|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
B HUSSEIN Obama, In The Pocket of Big Ethanol
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| B HUSSEIN Obama, In The Pocket of Big Ethanol
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| booybob |
No wonder he is against drilling and more refineries, he is in the pocket of the Big Ethanol groups.
Is this pandering or more of the change we can expect??
I'll await all the personal attacks and deflections on this topic as well.
Obama camp closely linked with ethanol
Industry endorsed by candidate has provided some of his top advisers
Sen. Barack Obama stands in front of a cornfield as he speaks during a gathering of potential supporters in Adel, Iowa, on on July 27, 2007.
View related photos
Charlie Neibergall / AP
Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol
When VeraSun Energy inaugurated a new ethanol processing plant last summer in Charles City, Iowa, some of that industry’s most prominent boosters showed up. Leaders of the National Corn Growers Association and the Renewable Fuels Association, for instance, came to help cut the ribbon — and so did Senator Barack Obama .
Then running far behind Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in name recognition and in the polls, Mr. Obama was in the midst of a campaign swing through the state where he would eventually register his first caucus victory. And as befits a senator from Illinois, the country’s second largest corn-producing state, he delivered a ringing endorsement of ethanol as an alternative fuel.
Mr. Obama is running as a reformer who is seeking to reduce the influence of special interests. But like any other politician, he has powerful constituencies that help shape his views. And when it comes to domestic ethanol, almost all of which is made from corn, he also has advisers and prominent supporters with close ties to the industry at a time when energy policy is a point of sharp contrast between the parties and their presidential candidates.
Story continues below ↓advertisement
In the heart of the Corn Belt that August day, Mr. Obama argued that embracing ethanol “ultimately helps our national security, because right now we’re sending billions of dollars to some of the most hostile nations on earth.” America’s oil dependence, he added, “makes it more difficult for us to shape a foreign policy that is intelligent and is creating security for the long term.”
Links to Tom Daschle
Nowadays, when Mr. Obama travels in farm country, he is sometimes accompanied by his friend Tom Daschle , the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota. Mr. Daschle now serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and works at a Washington law firm where, according to his online job description, “he spends a substantial amount of time providing strategic and policy advice to clients in renewable energy.”
Mr. Obama’s lead advisor on energy and environmental issues, Jason Grumet, came to the campaign from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan initiative associated with Mr. Daschle and Bob Dole , the Kansas Republican who is also a former Senate majority leader and a big ethanol backer who had close ties to the agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland .
More from NYTimes.com
Click links below:
Obama urges more regulation of oil speculators
Tom Brokaw will host 'Meet the Press'
Vets answer 'swift boat' challenge
External links
Not long after arriving in the Senate, Mr. Obama himself briefly provoked a controversy by flying at subsidized rates on corporate airplanes, including twice on jets owned by Archer Daniels Midland, which is the nation’s largest ethanol producer and is based in his home state.
Jason Furman , the Obama campaign’s economic policy director, said Mr. Obama’s stance on ethanol was based on its merits. “That is what has always motivated him on this issue, and will continue to determine his policy going forward,” Mr. Furman said.
Asked if Mr. Obama brought any predisposition or bias to the ethanol debate because he represents a corn-growing state that stands to benefit from a boom, Mr. Furman said, “He wants to represent the United States of America, and his policies are based on what’s best for the country.”
Mr. Daschle, a national co-chairman of the Obama campaign, said in a telephone interview on Friday that his role advising the Obama campaign on energy matters was limited. He said he was not a lobbyist for ethanol companies, but did speak publicly about renewable energy options and worked “with a number of associations and groups to orchestrate and coordinate their activities,” including the Governors’ Ethanol Coalition.
Of Mr. Obama, Mr. Daschle said, “He has a terrific policy staff and relies primarily on those key people to advise him on key issues, whether energy or climate change or other things.”
Obama, McCain differ on subsidies
Ethanol is one area in which Mr. Obama strongly disagrees with his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain of Arizona. While both presidential candidates emphasize the need for the United States to achieve “energy security” while also slowing down the carbon emissions that are believed to contribute to global warming, they offer sharply different visions of the role that ethanol, which can be made from a variety of organic materials, should play in those efforts.
Make predictions on news events
John McCain will win the presidency
Barack Obama will win the presidency
Mr. McCain advocates eliminating the multibillion-dollar annual government subsidies that domestic ethanol has long enjoyed. As a free trade advocate, he also opposes the 54-cent-a-gallon tariff that the United States slaps on imports of ethanol made from sugar cane, which packs more of an energy punch than corn-based ethanol and is cheaper to produce.
“We made a series of mistakes by not adopting a sustainable energy policy, one of which is the subsidies for corn ethanol, which I warned in Iowa were going to destroy the market” and contribute to inflation, Mr. McCain said this month in an interview with a Brazilian newspaper, O Estado de São Paulo. “Besides, it is wrong,” he added, to tax Brazilian-made sugar cane ethanol, “which is much more efficient than corn ethanol.”
Mr. Obama, in contrast, favors the subsidies, some of which end up in the hands of the same oil companies he says should be subjected to a windfall profits tax. In the name of helping the United States build “energy independence,” he also supports the tariff, which some economists say may well be illegal under the World Trade Organization ’s rules but which his advisers say is not.
Many economists, consumer advocates, environmental experts and tax groups have been critical of corn ethanol programs as a boondoggle that benefits agribusiness conglomerates more than small farmers. Those complaints have intensified recently as corn prices have risen sharply in tandem with oil prices and corn normally used for food stock has been diverted to ethanol production.
“If you want to take some of the pressure off this market, the obvious thing to do is lower that tariff and let some Brazilian ethanol come in,” said C. Ford Runge, an economist specializing in commodities and trade policy at the Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy at the University of Minnesota . “But one of the fundamental reasons biofuels policy is so out of whack with markets and reality is that interest group politics have been so dominant in the construction of the subsidies that support it.”
Click for related content
Ready to attack Obama, if money arrives
Obama, McCain spar on levees
McCain sneaks up on Obama in money race
Sugar cane more efficient
Corn ethanol generates less than two units of energy for every unit of energy used to produce it, while the energy ratio for sugar cane is more than 8 to 1. With lower production costs and cheaper land prices in the tropical countries where it is grown, sugar cane is a more efficient source.
Mr. Furman said the campaign continued to examine the issue. “We want to evaluate all our energy subsidies to make sure that taxpayers are getting their money’s worth,” he said.
He added that Mr. Obama favored “a range of initiatives” that were aimed at “diversification across countries and sources of energy,” including cellulosic ethanol, and which, unlike Mr. McCain’s proposals, were specifically meant to “reduce overall demand through conservation, new technology and improved efficiency.”
On the campaign trail, Mr. Obama has not explained his opposition to imported sugar cane ethanol. But in remarks last year, made as President Bush was about to sign an ethanol cooperation agreement with his Brazilian counterpart, Mr. Obama argued that “our country’s drive toward energy independence” could suffer if Mr. Bush relaxed restrictions, as Mr. McCain now proposes.
“It does not serve our national and economic security to replace imported oil with Brazilian ethanol,” he argued.
Mr. Obama does talk regularly about developing switchgrass, which flourishes in the Midwest and Great Plains, as a source for ethanol. While the energy ratio for switchgrass and other types of cellulosic ethanol is much greater than corn, economists say that time-consuming investments in infrastructure would be required to make it viable, and with corn nearing $8 a bushel, farmers have little incentive to shift.
Ethanol industry executives and advocates have not made large donations to either candidate for president, an examination of campaign contribution records shows. But they have noted the difference between Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain.
Brian Jennings, a vice president of the American Coalition for Ethanol, said he hoped that Mr. McCain, as a presidential candidate, “would take a broader view of energy security and recognize the important role that ethanol plays.”
The candidates’ views were tested recently in the Farm Bill approved by Congress that extended the subsidies for corn ethanol, though reducing them slightly, and the tariffs on imported sugar cane ethanol. Because Mr. McCain and Mr. Obama were campaigning, neither voted. But Mr. McCain said that as president he would veto the bill, while Mr. Obama praised it.
This story, After Attacks, Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol, originally appeared in The New York Times.
Picking the president: The candidates |
|
|
| zimmie |
| Providing subsidies to ethanol (corn) producers is no different than providing tax breaks to oil companies...Obama's policy is designed to make corporate farmers even richer, while the little farmer gets plowed under. |
|
|
| booybob |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
Providing subsidies to ethanol (corn) producers is no different than providing tax breaks to oil companies...Obama's policy is designed to make corporate farmers even richer, while the little farmer gets plowed under. |
Change we can believe in :rolleyes: |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
Providing subsidies to ethanol (corn) producers is no different than providing tax breaks to oil companies...Obama's policy is designed to make corporate farmers even richer, while the little farmer gets plowed under. |
And what exactly about that has the republicans upset?
That they didn't think of it first? |
|
|
| lao tzu |
| WHATS WITH THE CAPS ON HIS MIDDLE NAME, DO YOU CAPITALIZE HILLBILLY FAGGOT WHEN YOU WRITE YOUR OWN NAME.... |
|
|
| Tomofnnh |
"big ethanol" "corporate farmers"
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Bronks Breasts |
| There is a really small time documentary called ' King Corn " that deals with all the perks that the farmers throughout the midwest get through tax entitlements. I would rather have a president in the pocket of a more environmentally friendly force than oil and energy companies. I don't think Mazola is as to be feared as much as Exxon |
|
|
| zimmie |
Quote: Originally posted by Tomofnnh
"big ethanol" "corporate farmers"
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
Subsidies for corn ethanol
Corn ethanol subsidies totaled $7.0 billion in 2006 for 4.9 billion gallons of ethanol. That's $1.45 per gallon of ethanol (and $2.21 per gal of gas replaced).
Even with high gas prices in 2006, producing a gallon of ethanol cost 38¢ more than making gasoline with the same energy, so ethanol did need part of that subsidy. But what about the other $1.12. Not needed! So all of that became, $5.4 billion windfall of profits paid to real farmers, corporate farmers, and ethanol makers like multinational ADM. Why is it the farm states put up with this?!
Where did those subsidies come from:
1. 51¢ per gallon federal blenders credit for $2.5 billion = your tax dollars.
2. $0.9 billion in corn subsidies for ethanol corn = your tax dollars.
3. $3.6 billion extra paid at the pump.
That's quite a bit when you figure it only made us 1.1% more energy independent and only reduced US greenhouse gases by 1/19 of 1% .
Complete analysis of corn-ethanol subsidies:
Direct Subsidies ♦ Price premiums ♦ Social cost & windfall profits
Who should get the subsidy?
In 2006 ethanol blenders were handed $2,500 million in subsidies while the Department of Energy awarded $385 million spread over four to six years to help build cellulose ethanol plants. That's about 32 times less per year. But celluse gets a bit of subsidy from the USDA. Altogether it may get 10% as much as corn-ethanol. The problem is the lobby for cellulose is much weaker than the corn-ethanol lobby.
Corn ethanol does not need subsidies. Cellulose ethanol research does--it would actually do some good. But's what's needed is research, and very small-scale plants, not the big ones that are being built on pretense.
Oil get's big subsidies, not ethanol. Wrong by 54 times!
"Ethanol Today," (8/'05) states "Five years ago, a US General Accounting Office report showed that ethanol had received $11.6 billion in tax incentives since 1968, while the oil industry had received over $150 billion in tax benefit over the same period.
Probably true. But the oil industry produced 1068 times more energy so the subsidy rate per unit energy was 54 times higher for ethanol. That's like ethanol gets 54¢ and oil gets 1¢. Now if we had oil subsidies, and we do, and ADM is making more profit than ...
http://zfacts.com/p/63.html |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
And what exactly about that has the republicans upset?
That they didn't think of it first? |
Please explain how this fits the Barack Hussein Obama narrative of a 'new' type of politics, and 'change'?? when it is, in fact, the same old same old politics of influence, corruption, and positions which are for sale..... |
|
|
| zimmie |
old politics, but new influencers, corrupters and positions for sale
now thats change we can believe in |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Please explain how this fits the Barack Hussein Obama narrative of a 'new' type of politics, and 'change'?? when it is, in fact, the same old same old politics of influence, corruption, and positions which are for sale..... |
well, then, I'll just run out and vote for McCain. duh.
What the fuck do you think?
Are you stupid enough to believe that Obama's vastly different from any other successful politician around today? |
|
|
| zimmie |
| I don't believe he's any different, but many people do. He's setting people up for some big disappointments |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
I don't believe he's any different, but many people do. He's setting people up for some big disappointments |
After eight years of nothing but disappointment after disappointment, I guess we're about as ready as we'll ever be. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
well, then, I'll just run out and vote for McCain. duh.
What the fuck do you think?
Are you stupid enough to believe that Obama's vastly different from any other successful politician around today? |
Hey !!!! We get a little honesty from an Obama supporter!!!!! Unbelieveable...
Ok, now this is an opinion I can respect.
Unfortunately, most Barack Hussein Obama supporters DO believe that he is different from other politicians... Most on this board, prefer to put their heads in the sand whenever anyone challenges the veracity of the Barack Hussein Obama message... |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Hey !!!! We get a little honesty from an Obama supporter!!!!! Unbelieveable...
Ok, now this is an opinion I can respect.
Unfortunately, most Barack Hussein Obama supporters DO believe that he is different from other politicians... Most on this board, prefer to put their heads in the sand whenever anyone challenges the veracity of the Barack Hussein Obama message... |
Whatever he does, he will have to do within the framework of washington politics.
We all know this.
The environment doesn't exactly foster and nurture progressive change.
We all know this, too.
Personally, I'm not expecting too much from him. I'll be happy if he can just slow the downward spiral. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Whatever he does, he will have to do within the framework of washington politics.
We all know this.
The environment doesn't exactly foster and nurture progressive change.
We all know this, too.
Personally, I'm not expecting too much from him. I'll be happy if he can just slow the downward spiral. |
So to you, the end justifies the means...and what he says now is irrelevant, his lies ect....as long as it gets him elected....
And 99% of Obama supporters are either too blind to see the truth, or don't have the honesty to say that they don't care if he is lying. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
So to you, the end justifies the means...and what he says now is irrelevant, his lies ect....as long as it gets him elected....
And 99% of Obama supporters are either too blind to see the truth, or don't have the honesty to say that they don't care if he is lying. |
Let's just say I'm sick of hearing republican lies coming from the white house, and I want a change.
let's hear some democratic lies for a while. To be honest, I do prefer them to republican ones.
I mean, when given a choice between being lied to about an extramarital blowjob, and an illegal, unwinnable, never-ending middle-eastern occupation, I'll take the blowy, thanks. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Let's just say I'm sick of hearing republican lies coming from the white house, and I want a change.
let's hear some democratic lies for a while. To be honest, I do prefer them to republican ones.
I mean, when given a choice between being lied to about an extramarital blowjob, and an illegal, unwinnable, never-ending middle-eastern occupation, I'll take the blowy, thanks. |
Again...the end justifies the means....
And you think debunked left wing talking points are worse than the highest elected politician in the nation committing perjury and obstructing justice? |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Again...the end justifies the means....
And you think debunked left wing talking points are worse than the highest elected politician in the nation committing perjury and obstructing justice? |
blah, blah, fucking blah.
Talking to you is like watching a puppy being beat to death with a wiffle-ball bat.
It's fucking brutal.
You refuse to admit when you're wrong, and you're incapable of convincing anyone (who's not already drunk on kool-aid) that you're right.
It's literally an exercise in futility. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
blah, blah, fucking blah.
Talking to you is like watching a puppy being beat to death with a wiffle-ball bat.
It's fucking brutal.
You refuse to admit when you're wrong, and you're incapable of convincing anyone (who's not already drunk on kool-aid) that you're right.
It's literally an exercise in futility. |
Hurry, repeat some more talking points...that will convince everyone... :rolleyes:
Dumbass... |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Hurry, repeat some more talking points...that will convince everyone... :rolleyes:
Dumbass... |
convince everyone to what?
vote for Obama?
They don't need me for that. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
| By the way, your av is outdated - he looks a lot older now, and even more confused. |
|
|
| DUDE-HERE |
| OF COURSE HE IS ..THEY ALL ARE |
|
|
| JTProcess |
| "Waaa, we're gonna lose the white house this year... waaa" |
|
|
| WillowGlen |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
"Waaa, we're gonna lose the white house this year... waaa" |
Along with the 60 votes to stop filibuster in the Senate. Enjoy the ride assclowns. |
|
|
| booybob |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Let's just say I'm sick of hearing republican lies coming from the white house, and I want a change.
let's hear some democratic lies for a while. To be honest, I do prefer them to republican ones.
I mean, when given a choice between being lied to about an extramarital blowjob, and an illegal, unwinnable, never-ending middle-eastern occupation, I'll take the blowy, thanks. |
Finally, a great and honest opinion of why people support B HUSSEIN OSAMA. Thank You.
The sorry thing is that no matter who wins or what party is in charge, we a fucked either way.
I just find it amazing that all the Obamaites don't have a problem with this. Is this change, or more of the same bullshit just with a different name?? |
|
|
| Abba |
Quote: Originally posted by booybob
Finally, a great and honest opinion of why people support B HUSSEIN OSAMA. Thank You.
The sorry thing is that no matter who wins or what party is in charge, we a fucked either way.
I just find it amazing that all the Obamaites don't have a problem with this. Is this change, or more of the same bullshit just with a different name?? |
Wanna know a secret?? psst, no one takes you seriously when you call him HUSSEIN OSAMA . You sound like an unhinged retard.
Now, let's talk about corn for a sec, shall we? Then the wider picture.
Obama didn't invent this game. It was invented a LONG time ago, and one man running for President can't change shit while he's campaigning. Regardless of what they say, people are adverse to change. It scares them. That's why a hot chick will stay with her loser boyfriend. That's why people continue to go back to the same doctor even after he missed a diagnosis. That's why the same corrupt cunt stains keep getting reelected.
Do any of you look at the ingredients in the shit you buy to eat? My wife and I do. We've been doing it for at least 5 years, every time we go food shopping. It's right there on the label: high fructose corn syrup. It's in EVERYTHING. Bread, soda, candy, some meat, canned food, etc... Corn has been cheap forever because the government's been subsidizing it forever. It's not like we're a nation obsessed with eating corn on the cob. Most families eat it once or twice a year around the holidays or in the fall, and the rest of the year it's popcorn.
Those 2 food can barely account for all the corn we grow, so the farmers got creative on how to sell it. Now they feed it to livestock and process it for use in a shitload of different foods. We are talking about a massive structure that cannot be dismantled overnight.
Let's look at reality. It takes ALOT of money to win the Presidency. If you don't have the money, you don't win, it's that simple, and althoughm Obama has raised historic amounts of cash, the DNC has not. The RNC has $50 million on hand to fight him, while the DNC has 4.
The reality is that Obama NEEDS to have SOME big money on his side. Corn is HUGE, far more powerful than most know. Better to ahve that industry on the D side than the R side, especially since the republiCUNTS are in bed with Oil, Coal, Military Industrial, etc...
It's all a matter of perspective. This is really no big deal. The REAL beef I have with Obama is on FISA. It is completely and utterly deplorable that the Dems caved on this; not all of them, but enough to give it legs. Immunity should have been completely removed off the table, because it is completely anathema to our legal traditions. There are legal proceedings right now on this very issue, and Congress basically usurped the Courts by making a predetermined outcome to the trials.
I hope that he'll be strongly against it and use his bully pulpit to rouse the public against it as well.
So BoobyBob, once again I have shown you to be a tool and a hack. C'mon, keep on saying it and maybe it'll come true if you wish it hard enough.
HUSSEIN OSAMA
You don't realise that you played your only REAL hand against him, which is his NAME! hahahahahahahahahaha |
|
|
| Fred The Midget |
| How dare Obama support Ethanol, a clean source of renewable energy that can be grown domestically by US farmers (or produced in kelp sea farms) instead of Big Oil. What is he thinking supporting alternative energy not produced from our Middle Eastern slave masters? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by Fred The Midget
How dare Obama support Ethanol, a clean source of renewable energy that can be grown domestically by US farmers (or produced in kelp sea farms) instead of Big Oil. What is he thinking supporting alternative energy not produced from our Middle Eastern slave masters? |
Except that prices of food are rising because of ethanol production, ethanol is much less efficient than gasoline, and sugar based ethanol...among its other problems....
If he REALLY supported ethanol, why doesn't he support removing the $.54 per gallon tariff on imported ethanol? |
|
|
| Rush Has AIDS |
| I'm in the pocket of Big Peace, and Big Middle Class |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by Rush Has AIDS
I'm in the pocket of Big Peace, and Big Middle Class |
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
|
|
| JTProcess |
You're right booeyracist.
What would happen to our freedom if the country wasn't owned by big oil? I mean we might become energy independent like those fascists in Brazil...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
How would that be? Not having our corporate interests rape us of our tax money and military resources just because they are too lazy to invest in new energy technologies... the world would definitely suck ass if I couldn't turn on the tv and see little brown kids getting firebombed so Exxon Mobil can continue to rake in record profits. |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
If this is true why aren't you upset that the people you vote for stand for the exact opposite of all those things? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
You're right booeyracist.
What would happen to our freedom if the country wasn't owned by big oil? I mean we might become energy independent like those fascists in Brazil...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
How would that be? Not having our corporate interests rape us of our tax money and military resources just because they are too lazy to invest in new energy technologies... the world would definitely suck ass if I couldn't turn on the tv and see little brown kids getting firebombed so Exxon Mobil can continue to rake in record profits. |
Brazil uses sugar based ethanol, which is much better than corn based....and guess who just discovered a major oil deposit in the ocean? (if you said Brazil, you would be correct)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008...in4013564.shtml
I guess since they don't need it, they are going to give it away, riiiight? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
If this is true why aren't you upset that the people you vote for stand for the exact opposite of all those things? |
I don't vote for liberals, (whether Republican or Democrats) liberals stand in direct opposition to those things. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
.....and yet you are a willing slave, duped sheep, and goose-stepping fascist Cunt.
I guess you are one of the biggest failures of all time.
NCDike69
Limp Member
Jerk-off
NCDikey-Drone "6 of 9"
"Hive-Mind" Member
In the Brainwashed "Collective"
NCReichDike
Fascist Member
Un-hinged |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I don't vote for liberals, (whether Republican or Democrats) liberals stand in direct opposition to those things. |
Kream-Aid Mike06
Brainwashed Member
Swallowing That Sweet GOP Nectar
Posting Frequency_______
Kream-Guzzling Like a MoFo...
NCDike69
DUPED Member
On Kool-Aid
Posting Frequency_____________________
Exposing Himself Like a MoFo... |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I don't vote for liberals, (whether Republican or Democrats) liberals stand in direct opposition to those things. |
ohh you're good... standing firm in opposition to the dictionary like that... takes major balls. |
|
|
| jigzaw |
| Oh jeez, you mean he's working with American businesses to further develop technologies that might help us get off of oil produced by our enemies? What a scumbag. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
You're right booeyracist.
What would happen to our freedom if the country wasn't owned by big oil? I mean we might become energy independent like those fascists in Brazil...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
How would that be? Not having our corporate interests rape us of our tax money and military resources just because they are too lazy to invest in new energy technologies... the world would definitely suck ass if I couldn't turn on the tv and see little brown kids getting firebombed so Exxon Mobil can continue to rake in record profits. |
The difference between what Brazil does and the group that Obama is beholden to is that Brazil produces ethanol from sugarcane, which is not a food staple. On the other hand, corn is a food staple and corn-based ethanol will not only lead to higher prices for food in the US (remember that livestock is fed corn - it's not just bread and other foods) but food worldwide. Like oil, there is only so much corn to go around and when the supply decreases and demand remains constant then the price goes up.
As for Obama - the problem with so much of his support is that they bought into his empty platitudes (change, hope, new politics) but never bothered to ask what they meant or how he would implement them. So when Obama is found to be in the back pocket of an industry, goes back on his promise to pursue public financing or his string of recent flip-flops, his supporters are shocked. MoveOn.org and the kool-aid drinkers at the Daily Kos are having a hissy-fit because Obama has said he will sign the wiretapping bill this week. They need to start to see Obama for who he is, not how David Axelrod marketed him - and the media needs to start doing its job and stop acting like they are his personal press secretaries. |
|
|
| Rush Has AIDS |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
You better talk to your advisors... they really screwed the pooch for you there. ;) |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
The difference between what Brazil does and the group that Obama is beholden to is that Brazil produces ethanol from sugarcane, which is not a food staple. On the other hand, corn is a food staple and corn-based ethanol will not only lead to higher prices for food in the US (remember that livestock is fed corn - it's not just bread and other foods) but food worldwide. Like oil, there is only so much corn to go around and when the supply decreases and demand remains constant then the price goes up.
As for Obama - the problem with so much of his support is that they bought into his empty platitudes (change, hope, new politics) but never bothered to ask what they meant or how he would implement them. So when Obama is found to be in the back pocket of an industry, goes back on his promise to pursue public financing or his string of recent flip-flops, his supporters are shocked. MoveOn.org and the kool-aid drinkers at the Daily Kos are having a hissy-fit because Obama has said he will sign the wiretapping bill this week. They need to start to see Obama for who he is, not how David Axelrod marketed him - and the media needs to start doing its job and stop acting like they are his personal press secretaries. |
I understand the difference between the ethanol brazil uses and the ethanol that the farm lobbies are pushing for here in the states... those farm lobbies are one of the reasons we aren't trying to go to a sugarcane based ethanol...
Whatever the case, I'd much rather be giving my money to the US farming industry than regimes like Saudi Arabia... energy independence is the key here... gassing up our cars won't fund terrorism if the fuel is being grown in Idaho...
I don't even think ethanol is the complete answer but it's a good start... especially since there have already been breakthroughs in modern steam and of course hydrogen... ethanol will probably end up being a transitional tool to other cheaper and more simple sources of power.
as for your list of anti-Obama talking points... even if they were true he's still a far better candidate than McCain could ever hope to be. Twisting the nuances of his positions into conservative cannon fodder will probably work on the old scared and uneducated... but anyone who bothers to do any reading can see through it. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
Whatever the case, I'd much rather be giving my money to the US farming industry than regimes like Saudi Arabia... energy independence is the key here... gassing up our cars won't fund terrorism if the fuel is being grown in Idaho... |
You must hate America.
:mad: |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
I understand the difference between the ethanol brazil uses and the ethanol that the farm lobbies are pushing for here in the states... those farm lobbies are one of the reasons we aren't trying to go to a sugarcane based ethanol...
Whatever the case, I'd much rather be giving my money to the US farming industry than regimes like Saudi Arabia... energy independence is the key here... gassing up our cars won't fund terrorism if the fuel is being grown in Idaho...
I don't even think ethanol is the complete answer but it's a good start... especially since there have already been breakthroughs in modern steam and of course hydrogen... ethanol will probably end up being a transitional tool to other cheaper and more simple sources of power. |
Alright, then why not drill domestically and not go after our food supply? Ethanol is a dodge and it will never happen as long as people need food on their tables and our population continues to grow.
As I've said before, there is a short-term and a long-term solution to this. I'm all for hydrogen/steam and all the rest, but these are goals that will take decades (like, 2050) to implement. We should be drilling everywhere we can domestically now and in 10 years we can forgo the need for oil from Saudi Arabia.
Quote: Originally posted by JTProcess
as for your list of anti-Obama talking points... even if they were true he's still a far better candidate than McCain could ever hope to be. Twisting the nuances of his positions into conservative cannon fodder will probably work on the old scared and uneducated... but anyone who bothers to do any reading can see through it. |
I'm not "twisting the nuances of his positions" - I am merely pointing out that his "change" nonsense and promise to "fix Washington" and usher in a "new politics" is bullshit. Obama is a politician, through and through. To cast him as anything else is disingenuous.
We can debate the issues - we just need to wait to see where Obama will decide where he is on them. |
|
|
| Spinboy |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Alright, then why not drill domestically and not go after our food supply? Ethanol is a dodge and it will never happen as long as people need food on their tables and our population continues to grow.
As I've said before, there is a short-term and a long-term solution to this. I'm all for hydrogen/steam and all the rest, but these are goals that will take decades (like, 2050) to implement. We should be drilling everywhere we can domestically now and in 10 years we can forgo the need for oil from Saudi Arabia.
I'm not "twisting the nuances of his positions" - I am merely pointing out that his "change" nonsense and promise to "fix Washington" and usher in a "new politics" is bullshit. Obama is a politician, through and through. To cast him as anything else is disingenuous.
We can debate the issues - we just need to wait to see where Obama will decide where he is on them. |
:claphand:
Joe Carroll
Bloomberg News
Colorado and Utah have as much oil as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria, Kuwait, Libya, Angola, Algeria, Indonesia, Qatar and United Arab Emirates combined. Trapped in limestone up to 200 feet thick in the two Rocky Mountain states is enough so-called shale oil to rival OPEC and supply the United States for a century.
Exxon Mobil and Chevron, the two biggest U.S. energy companies, and Royal Dutch Shell Plc are spending $100 million a year testing methods to separate the oil from the stone for as little as $30 a barrel. A growing number of industry executives and analysts say new technology and persistently high prices make the idea feasible.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarep...-shale0529.html |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Spinboy
:claphand:
Joe Carroll
Bloomberg News
Colorado and Utah have as much oil as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Nigeria, Kuwait, Libya, Angola, Algeria, Indonesia, Qatar and United Arab Emirates combined. Trapped in limestone up to 200 feet thick in the two Rocky Mountain states is enough so-called shale oil to rival OPEC and supply the United States for a century.
Exxon Mobil and Chevron, the two biggest U.S. energy companies, and Royal Dutch Shell Plc are spending $100 million a year testing methods to separate the oil from the stone for as little as $30 a barrel. A growing number of industry executives and analysts say new technology and persistently high prices make the idea feasible.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarep...-shale0529.html |
Yup, that's the truth.
It was amazing to watch the Democrat leadership in Congress say that the Bush Administration should prod the Saudis to increase their oil output while our vast energy resources are not to be touched.
If the Democrats leave this week without lifting the ban on off-shore drilling then they will have to explain why Americans will have to continue to deal with $4 + gas for years to come. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
What can you say when you watch someone make a statement while standing in front of a mountain of contrary evidence?
Your sig says that you stumped a liberal - well, you've stumped another one, because I am absolutely floored. I stand in awe of your ability to ignore the facts that directly contradict you in spite of the fucking mountains and mountains of them that surround us all.
It's literally like seeing you stand in the middle of a garbage dump smearing yourself with feces, while bloviating about how clean you like to be.
absolutely amazing. |
|
|
| Abba |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I don't vote for liberals, (whether Republican or Democrats) liberals stand in direct opposition to those things. |
Actually Mike, nothing could be further from the truth, which again reinforces the widely held belief that you are nothing more than a talking point fed shill for the party with the "R".
In fact, neo-conservatism was the result of a backlash against LIBERALISM, in an era where INDIVIDUALITY trumped the collective. Neocons were unhappy with the fact that government and society emphasised the LIBERAL view that people should be allowed to make their own decisions, belief whatever they wanted to, and live generally free from government interventon.
This was in the 60's, a direct result of the pinnacle of the Liberal movement that spawned the seeds of neoconservatism. The people you now ardently support are AGAINST, I repeat, AGAINST individuality and individual freedoms and dissent of any kind. Instead, they seek to unite the nation against a common enemy, and according to Strauss, the Father of Neoconservatism, if an enemy doesn't exist, it must be created.
That's why bin Laden, who has repeatedly denied his involvement in the attacks, has been inflated to this SPECTRE type of organization.
If you REALLY want individual freedom and less government, than TRUE Liberalism is the way to go. |
|
|
| Delete France |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
After eight years of nothing but disappointment after disappointment, I guess we're about as ready as we'll ever be. |
Another brainwashed liberal, keep watching CNN you little Marxist. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Delete France
Another brainwashed liberal, keep watching CNN you little Marxist. |
go fuck yourself, numbnuts. |
|
|
| Abba |
Quote: Originally posted by Delete France
Another brainwashed liberal, keep watching CNN you little Marxist. |
Yeah, things are so fucking great in America right now. :rolleyes:
What kind of world do you live in??
Oh yeah, the kind that want to "delete france" because they took the CORRECT position on invading Iraq 5 years ago. :rolleyes: Your stupidity is mind boggling. |
|
|
| Marinolaw |
Quote: Originally posted by Delete France
Another brainwashed liberal, keep watching CNN you little Marxist. |
I've said this often here, I had been a Republican since 1988, i voted for W in 2000, and 2004.
Today I am an Independent, the party and president I supported has taken the country I love and sold it to the Christian right, and special interests in conservative's clothing,
I have financially supported the party and it's candidates for 20 years, when my phone rings, and I get solicitations i tell them that they have received my last dollar and should hang their heads in shame.
the fact that anyone who cannot recognize the fact that this administration was hijacked just like those four planes on 9/11 is beyond hope. |
|
|
| Reverend Tyler |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Yup, that's the truth.
It was amazing to watch the Democrat leadership in Congress say that the Bush Administration should prod the Saudis to increase their oil output while our vast energy resources are not to be touched.
If the Democrats leave this week without lifting the ban on off-shore drilling then they will have to explain why Americans will have to continue to deal with $4 + gas for years to come. |
So how many days after they start off-shore drilling will gas start to plummet in price? |
|
|
| uhohhotdog |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
I bet your into big individualism. Your wife is a fucking elephant.
Fuck you Mike. You have spewed more hatred and LIES on this site than any other poster. Stop posting your bullshit ideas here. No one likes you, you're a fucking loser in life and the world would be a better place if your mom had been raped by someone else.
FUCK OFF. |
|
|
| Delete France |
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
Yeah, things are so fucking great in America right now. :rolleyes:
What kind of world do you live in??
Oh yeah, the kind that want to "delete france" because they took the CORRECT position on invading Iraq 5 years ago. :rolleyes: Your stupidity is mind boggling. |
The real war has not even started yet dickhead, stay tuned.... |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Delete France
The real war has not even started yet dickhead, stay tuned.... |
I'm so excited, I think I'm gonna come in my pants!!
No, wait - that's you. |
|
|
| Fred The Midget |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Except that prices of food are rising because of ethanol production, ethanol is much less efficient than gasoline, and sugar based ethanol...among its other problems.... |
Prices for everything are rising because the dollar is shit right now. Inflation is through the roof because Bernanke kept lowering interest rates in order to stimulate the sagging economy.
In the future, we can sea farm kelp in order to produce ethanol. You don't have to use corn, which is needed for animal feed for farmers. Growing kelp to produce ethanol will not affect the corn and food prices in the USA. |
|
|
| booybob |
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
Wanna know a secret?? psst, no one takes you seriously when you call him HUSSEIN OSAMA . You sound like an unhinged retard.
Now, let's talk about corn for a sec, shall we? Then the wider picture.
Obama didn't invent this game. It was invented a LONG time ago, and one man running for President can't change shit while he's campaigning. Regardless of what they say, people are adverse to change. It scares them. That's why a hot chick will stay with her loser boyfriend. That's why people continue to go back to the same doctor even after he missed a diagnosis. That's why the same corrupt cunt stains keep getting reelected.
Do any of you look at the ingredients in the shit you buy to eat? My wife and I do. We've been doing it for at least 5 years, every time we go food shopping. It's right there on the label: high fructose corn syrup. It's in EVERYTHING. Bread, soda, candy, some meat, canned food, etc... Corn has been cheap forever because the government's been subsidizing it forever. It's not like we're a nation obsessed with eating corn on the cob. Most families eat it once or twice a year around the holidays or in the fall, and the rest of the year it's popcorn.
Those 2 food can barely account for all the corn we grow, so the farmers got creative on how to sell it. Now they feed it to livestock and process it for use in a shitload of different foods. We are talking about a massive structure that cannot be dismantled overnight.
Let's look at reality. It takes ALOT of money to win the Presidency. If you don't have the money, you don't win, it's that simple, and althoughm Obama has raised historic amounts of cash, the DNC has not. The RNC has $50 million on hand to fight him, while the DNC has 4.
The reality is that Obama NEEDS to have SOME big money on his side. Corn is HUGE, far more powerful than most know. Better to ahve that industry on the D side than the R side, especially since the republiCUNTS are in bed with Oil, Coal, Military Industrial, etc...
It's all a matter of perspective. This is really no big deal. The REAL beef I have with Obama is on FISA. It is completely and utterly deplorable that the Dems caved on this; not all of them, but enough to give it legs. Immunity should have been completely removed off the table, because it is completely anathema to our legal traditions. There are legal proceedings right now on this very issue, and Congress basically usurped the Courts by making a predetermined outcome to the trials.
I hope that he'll be strongly against it and use his bully pulpit to rouse the public against it as well.
So BoobyBob, once again I have shown you to be a tool and a hack. C'mon, keep on saying it and maybe it'll come true if you wish it hard enough.
HUSSEIN OSAMA
You don't realise that you played your only REAL hand against him, which is his NAME! hahahahahahahahahaha |
So you are saying that selling out and pandering to interests YOU LIKE is ok because you like the causes. Is that not selling out to Big farms like Bush has sold out to Big Oil??
Since he needs big money on his side, you are ok that he will have to follow the lead of Big Whatever as long as he is a democrat it is ok?? Come on man, you have to be able to see right through this.
I still don't remember you answering the question about his UNCONDITIONAL support
for the state of Israel. Is this the kind of change you wanted or is this another case of it's ok because he is my guy?? |
|
|
| acefree |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I don't vote for liberals, (whether Republican or Democrats) liberals stand in direct opposition to those things. |
isnt bush a liberal? |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by Fred The Midget
In the future, we can sea farm kelp in order to produce ethanol. You don't have to use corn, which is needed for animal feed for farmers. Growing kelp to produce ethanol will not affect the corn and food prices in the USA. |
And kelp fields in the ocean can be laid one on top of the other, really maximizing yield per acre. |
|
|
| mkriss5681 |
"Big Ethanol"
:rolleyes: :jj:
What a dumb fuck title of this thread. |
|
|
| Rush Has AIDS |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Yup, that's the truth.
It was amazing to watch the Democrat leadership in Congress say that the Bush Administration should prod the Saudis to increase their oil output while our vast energy resources are not to be touched.
If the Democrats leave this week without lifting the ban on off-shore drilling then they will have to explain why Americans will have to continue to deal with $4 + gas for years to come. |
I'll explain it to you now.
The oil companies have THOUSANDS of land leases to drill in all of the oil rich areas, including Alaska AND in the Gulf. These leases are NOT being used! In other words, they are sitting there, untouched, with oil to be had, yet Big Oil will not touch them. They have to have more, I wonder why?
There's your answer. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
Actually Mike, nothing could be further from the truth, which again reinforces the widely held belief that you are nothing more than a talking point fed shill for the party with the "R". |
LOL..'the widely held belief'... :burst: I am not even a Republican...
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
In fact, neo-conservatism was the result of a backlash against LIBERALISM, in an era where INDIVIDUALITY trumped the collective. Neocons were unhappy with the fact that government and society emphasised the LIBERAL view that people should be allowed to make their own decisions, belief whatever they wanted to, and live generally free from government interventon. |
The liberal view is NOT that people should be allowed to make their own decisions. Are you insane?? Please square this comment with what currently exists today.
Who is it that blocks INDIVIDUALS from making their own choice in Social Security?...liberals.
Who is it that wishes to completely remove choice from the health care arena? - liberals.
Who is it that demands more money be taken from those who achieve, and have it be re-distributed to those who don't achieve? Liberals.
WHo is it that fights for and passes slow/no growth policies which drastically limit personal freedom? Liberals.
WHo is it that passes insane environmental policies which drastically limit how people can use land that THEY own....? liberals.
Who is it that wish to take away the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Liberals.
Who is it that refuses parents the CHOICE to send their child to the school of THEIR choice? Liberals.
Who is it that tells you what size toilet you can have in your newly built home, and what type of lightbulb you will be able to buy?? Liberals..
You have got to be fucking kidding me....this could me the most ridiculous thing you, or anyone else on this board has ever posted. It is beyond ridiculous. It is hysterically sad that someone would actually say something like you did, AND attach anytype of identification to it..
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
This was in the 60's, a direct result of the pinnacle of the Liberal movement that spawned the seeds of neoconservatism. The people you now ardently support are AGAINST, I repeat, AGAINST individuality and individual freedoms and dissent of any kind. Instead, they seek to unite the nation against a common enemy, and according to Strauss, the Father of Neoconservatism, if an enemy doesn't exist, it must be created. |
I am a conservative.....You, like most others (all on this board it seems) have NO CLUE what a Neo-conservative is, or where the name stems.
THe 60's was a mostly wasted generation. And it is ironic that the liberals of the 60's who railed against the system, are now THE SYSTEM... Those who created the War on Poverty, fought for surrender in Vietnam, and who generally sent this country in a downward spiral WERE liberals, and have moved so far left now that they are indistinguishable from Marxists.
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
That's why bin Laden, who has repeatedly denied his involvement in the attacks, has been inflated to this SPECTRE type of organization. |
Ummm ballsack...he has admitted to them...YEARS ago...while he was still alive, that is.
Quote: Originally posted by Abba
If you REALLY want individual freedom and less government, than TRUE Liberalism is the way to go. |
Todays liberalism = Marxism. Represented by Barack Hussein Obama....there is NOTHING, and I cannot state that enough...NOTHING individualistic, or representative of less government in the Marxist movement of today...of which you happily belong...otherwise known as the American left. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
NCDike....fighting with the dictionary again.
This is the ignorant shit you get when you learn your vocabulary from Rush and Hannity.
NCMoron: simply "not" a republican
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
|
|
| uhohhotdog |
I'm addressing each of your issues in CAPS...
Who is it that blocks INDIVIDUALS from making their own choice in Social Security?...liberals.YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT WE SHOULD PRIVATIZE IT. OUR BETTER YET, PUT IT ON SLIPPY SUSY TO WIN IN THE 4TH RACE.
Who is it that wishes to completely remove choice from the health care arena? - liberals. THEY DO WANT YOU TO HAVE A CHOICE. THEY WANT EVERYONE TO HAVE A CHOICE TO BE COVERED. IT'S CALLED BEING HUMAN BEINGS.
Who is it that demands more money be taken from those who achieve, and have it be re-distributed to those who don't achieve? Liberals. I'M GUESSING THAT YOU'RE NOT A BIG EARNER, SO WHY YOU WOULD WANT HEDGE FUNDERS AND CEOS TO GET MORE MONEY MAKES NO SENSE.
WHo is it that fights for and passes slow/no growth policies which drastically limit personal freedom? Liberals. LIKE THE PATRIOT ACT AND FISA?
WHo is it that passes insane environmental policies which drastically limit how people can use land that THEY own....? liberals. BY THAT RATIONAL IF I AM SHOOTING A RIFLE AT PEOPLE ON MY OWN PROPERTY, THAT'S FINE.
Who is it that wish to take away the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Liberals. SORRY, WE WANT TO MAKE IT LESS EASY FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU AREN'T ABLE TO GO SHOOT UP A BIG LOTS. HOWEVER, IF I WAS PROMISED YOU'D GET HIT, I'D JOIN THE NRA TOMORROW.
Who is it that refuses parents the CHOICE to send their child to the school of THEIR choice? Liberals. THIS IS NONSENSE.
Who is it that tells you what size toilet you can have in your newly built home, and what type of lightbulb you will be able to buy?? Liberals.. GO BACK A FEW POINTS....WE ALL LIVE ON THE SAME PLANET YOU FUCKING MORON.
THe 60's was a mostly wasted generation. And it is ironic that the liberals of the 60's who railed against the system, are now THE SYSTEM... Those who created the War on Poverty, fought for surrender in Vietnam, and who generally sent this country in a downward spiral WERE liberals, and have moved so far left now that they are indistinguishable from Marxists.
THIS IS A SHAMEFUL STATEMENT. THE SPACE RACE, CIVIL RIGHTS AND PEOPLE SPEAKING OUT IS A WASTE? WHY COULD'T YOUR PARENTS HAVE GONE TO KENT ST.
ONCE AGAIN, YOU'VE LOST, MIKE. BUT IT'S NOT FAIR FIGHT. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. NOW GO FEED YOU'RE HEIFFER. I MEAN WIFE. |
|
|
| thoroldjames |
Quote: Originally posted by mkriss5681
"Big Ethanol"
:rolleyes: :jj:
What a dumb fuck title of this thread. |
If it ever did take off there would be a Big Ethanol
and it would be owned be owned by Exxon, BP ect
it'll be the same bunch selling a different product for the same cash |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Quote: Originally posted by Marinolaw
I've said this often here, I had been a Republican since 1988, i voted for W in 2000, and 2004.
Today I am an Independent, the party and president I supported has taken the country I love and sold it to the Christian right, and special interests in conservative's clothing,
I have financially supported the party and it's candidates for 20 years, when my phone rings, and I get solicitations i tell them that they have received my last dollar and should hang their heads in shame.
the fact that anyone who cannot recognize the fact that this administration was hijacked just like those four planes on 9/11 is beyond hope. |
I for one applaud your ability to see through the partisanship... Some people are too proud to do that.
I've only been voting in presidential elections since 2000 and have never voted Republican but there are definitely still some stand up guys in the GOP... Chuck Hagel and Lincoln Chaffe to name a few off the top of my head...
Whatever the case... if the last 8 years of bs had been helmed by a Democrat you can bet I would be voting anything but Democrat this year. |
|
|
| JTProcess |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
Alright, then why not drill domestically and not go after our food supply? Ethanol is a dodge and it will never happen as long as people need food on their tables and our population continues to grow.
As I've said before, there is a short-term and a long-term solution to this. I'm all for hydrogen/steam and all the rest, but these are goals that will take decades (like, 2050) to implement. We should be drilling everywhere we can domestically now and in 10 years we can forgo the need for oil from Saudi Arabia. |
Here's the thing VTW... those goals would not take that long if we invested the same amount of money we've already dropped into Iraq in streamlining them... Oil is an exhaustable resource that's dwindling fast... it's time to move on... it's going to be rough no doubt but it needs to start happening. We are being outrun by other countries where the United States used to be the leader... that is unacceptable. Fuck a short term solution... It's time to invest in a long term one.
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
I'm not "twisting the nuances of his positions" - I am merely pointing out that his "change" nonsense and promise to "fix Washington" and usher in a "new politics" is bullshit. Obama is a politician, through and through. To cast him as anything else is disingenuous.
We can debate the issues - we just need to wait to see where Obama will decide where he is on them. |
You are twisting his positions to your liking... your slogan should be "we fear change... and just about anything else you tell us to be afraid of"
His "change" nonsense is obviously speaking to some people or he wouldn't have won the democratic primary and be polling 15 points ahead of John W. Magoo... his positions are very clear if you bother to od any research... maybe not so much if you've got a head full of Sean Hannity though... I understand your dilemma... I don't support it but I Understand.
Do some reading eh? |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by thoroldjames
If it ever did take off there would be a Big Ethanol
and it would be owned be owned by Exxon, BP ect
it'll be the same bunch selling a different product for the same cash |
Denmark now gets 20% of its power from wind, and that is growing every year. That is a lot of renewable energy generation.
Many of the turbines used to be owned by co-ops, local people sharing in the energy and profits. An industry has of course arisen now, and corporations make and run the big farms.
But I just don't see us ever going to "war" because there is a lot of good "wind" in some middle eastern country.
Its a start.... |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
LOL..'the widely held belief'... :burst: I am not even a Republican...
The liberal view is NOT that people should be allowed to make their own decisions. Are you insane?? Please square this comment with what currently exists today.
Who is it that blocks INDIVIDUALS from making their own choice in Social Security?...liberals.
Who is it that wishes to completely remove choice from the health care arena? - liberals.
Who is it that demands more money be taken from those who achieve, and have it be re-distributed to those who don't achieve? Liberals.
WHo is it that fights for and passes slow/no growth policies which drastically limit personal freedom? Liberals.
WHo is it that passes insane environmental policies which drastically limit how people can use land that THEY own....? liberals.
Who is it that wish to take away the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Liberals.
Who is it that refuses parents the CHOICE to send their child to the school of THEIR choice? Liberals.
Who is it that tells you what size toilet you can have in your newly built home, and what type of lightbulb you will be able to buy?? Liberals..
You have got to be fucking kidding me....this could me the most ridiculous thing you, or anyone else on this board has ever posted. It is beyond ridiculous. It is hysterically sad that someone would actually say something like you did, AND attach anytype of identification to it..
I am a conservative.....You, like most others (all on this board it seems) have NO CLUE what a Neo-conservative is, or where the name stems.
THe 60's was a mostly wasted generation. And it is ironic that the liberals of the 60's who railed against the system, are now THE SYSTEM... Those who created the War on Poverty, fought for surrender in Vietnam, and who generally sent this country in a downward spiral WERE liberals, and have moved so far left now that they are indistinguishable from Marxists.
Ummm ballsack...he has admitted to them...YEARS ago...while he was still alive, that is.
Todays liberalism = Marxism. Represented by Barack Hussein Obama....there is NOTHING, and I cannot state that enough...NOTHING individualistic, or representative of less government in the Marxist movement of today...of which you happily belong...otherwise known as the American left. |
CALM DOWN LIEMASTER! YOU NEED TO LET THE MEDS WORK TODAY BEFORE YOU POST!
. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Hey !!!! We get a little honesty from an Obama supporter!!!!! Unbelieveable...
Ok, now this is an opinion I can respect.
Unfortunately, most Barack Hussein Obama supporters DO believe that he is different from other politicians... Most on this board, prefer to put their heads in the sand whenever anyone challenges the veracity of the Barack Hussein Obama message... |
UHT OH ! BARRACK DERANGEMENT SYNDROME ! |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
I'm in the pocket of big freedom, big individualism...and little government. |
Then explain why the GOVERMENT has grown faster and larger under Geroge BUSH ?
Is it getting a little tight in that psuedo intellectual straight jacket you wear? |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
LOL..'the widely held belief'... :burst: I am not even a Republican...
The liberal view is NOT that people should be allowed to make their own decisions. Are you insane?? Please square this comment with what currently exists today.
Who is it that blocks INDIVIDUALS from making their own choice in Social Security?...liberals.
Who is it that wishes to completely remove choice from the health care arena? - liberals.
Who is it that demands more money be taken from those who achieve, and have it be re-distributed to those who don't achieve? Liberals.
WHo is it that fights for and passes slow/no growth policies which drastically limit personal freedom? Liberals.
WHo is it that passes insane environmental policies which drastically limit how people can use land that THEY own....? liberals.
Who is it that wish to take away the constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Liberals.
Who is it that refuses parents the CHOICE to send their child to the school of THEIR choice? Liberals.
Who is it that tells you what size toilet you can have in your newly built home, and what type of lightbulb you will be able to buy?? Liberals..
You have got to be fucking kidding me....this could me the most ridiculous thing you, or anyone else on this board has ever posted. It is beyond ridiculous. It is hysterically sad that someone would actually say something like you did, AND attach anytype of identification to it..
I am a conservative.....You, like most others (all on this board it seems) have NO CLUE what a Neo-conservative is, or where the name stems.
|
| | | | | |
