he can't solve the problem, it lies at the feet of every american to do their part in making us less dependent on others for our energy needs. ask yourself what you can do to solve our energy crisis and write down the answers, get back to us on how you go about implementing a plan for your house, office or other area that is part of the problem in our consumer nation.
He's going to solve it with change.
Yes we can.
hahahahahahahaha
in a quinnipiac poll 99.9 % of Blacks will vote for Obama because he is exciting and represents change.
What change, no one knows...but P Diddy endorsed this Presumptive Presidential candidate.
P. Diddy whose clothing line is made in China.
The answer to the question regarding his plan for the energy crisis is to criticise
John McCain, that's his plan..It's no plan..just a lot of 3 card monty...
YES WE CAN.
Yes we can.
hahahahahahahaha
in a quinnipiac poll 99.9 % of Blacks will vote for Obama because he is exciting and represents change.
What change, no one knows...but P Diddy endorsed this Presumptive Presidential candidate.
P. Diddy whose clothing line is made in China.
The answer to the question regarding his plan for the energy crisis is to criticise
John McCain, that's his plan..It's no plan..just a lot of 3 card monty...
YES WE CAN.
hey legend, sorry to hear you didn't make the decision to upgrade. the walking to work idea not only helps the enviroment but ensures you live a longer life. i know this sounds idiotic but if we all did a little more we could do with a little less, i've certainly curtailed my driving and tried other things to reduce consumption in my home.
Interesting ....
McCain's energy plan? he got the concept from Jimmy Carter!!!
<table width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="postHeader">McCain Embraces Jimmy Carter’s Energy Policy
</td> <td align="right" valign="top" width="20">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
On Tuesday John McCain bravely told cheering Houston oil executives that the U.S. should encourage more domestic oil production, especially drilling off US coasts, a proposal the White House will now front even though its long-run effect would be minimal. [More on the offshore drilling proposal from Mother Jones, and CNN notes McCain's flip/flop (h/t Steve Benen at C&L)]
McCain then embraced the rationale and basic elements of Jimmy Carter's energy policies from 30 years ago, policies that Reagan, Bush I and Bush II tried to starve.
As almost every US politician does today, McCain emphasized how our economic and national security are undermined by an overreliance on imported oil, especially from autocratic regimes hostile to the US. Carter gave a similar speech in the 1970s, except he wore a sweater and spoke next to a fireplace, while McCain spoke comfortably in an air conditioned room in one of the most air-conditioned cities of the US.
To end our oil addiction, Carter told the nation we should promote conservation, develop alternative energy sources and technologies, subsidize efforts to make coal-based energy cleaner, and rely much more on nuclear power. He proposed we begin to move away from reliance on imported oil by expanding domestic production and developing oil substitutes, such as liquid derivatives from coal. The same basic concepts were in McCain's speech yesterday.
Jimmy Carter faced another oil crisis, also caused by US meddling in the Middle East in ways that sparked the Iranian revolution, OPEC oil embargoes, and a doubling and quadrupling of world oil prices. Bush has presided over a five- to six-fold price increase. John McCain has finally come around to Carter's strategic assessment that our degree of dependence on oil is a danger to our security, but unlike Carter, McCain has not yet connected US military misadventures to our strategic energy vulnerabilities.
Thirty years ago, we realized that a critical piece of a sound energy policy is that the US should not start unnecessary, unprovoked wars in the Middle East. Promoting peace in the Middle East through negotiations among hostile parties made both security and energy sense. But McCain can't connect these dots without conceding Obama was right and admitting his own advocacy of invading Iraq was a huge blunder. He can't admit the link between today's volatile oil markets and his advocacy of the surge, sabre-rattling on Iran, and telling the Muslim world he plans to stay in Iraq for a hundred years.
And McCain didn't help matters with his intemperate condemnation of last week's Supreme Court ruling that people indiscriminately swept up in Bush's disastrous terror war and held indefinitely should be accorded the fundamental human right of having the government justify to an impartial tribunal why they're being held. He shares that disdain with those oil producing nations with authoritarian regimes. But their citizens know whose nationals were tortured and held at Gitmo and Bagram, and they know McCain says it's okay for the CIA and Bush to keep doing that.
McCain lamented today's high energy prices -- oil at $134/bbl, gas at over $4/gallon -- and noted predictions they could go much higher. But he never linked the necessity of high prices -- or taxes that might replicate them -- to the economic viability of his preferred alternatives.
Spending only two lines on energy conservation, his only near-term solution was the gas-tax holiday scheme. Gasoline prices have already risen more than the tax of 18.4 cents/gallon in the two months since he first proposed the idea. So if we'd done exactly what McCain advocated then, gas prices would be about where they are today, except imports would be higher, the oil producers would be billions richer and the Highway Trust Fund would be short about the same amount.
McCain also managed to misrepresent Obama's energy views on coal, taxes and climate change -- likely a major purpose of the speech -- but in the process he contradicted himself on global climate change, implying we should build more conventional coal plants. He did that by criticizing Obama for not advocating conventional coal, even though Obama, like McCain, consistently uses the terms "clean coal."
But don't worry about this confusion; there will likely be a clarification today or perhaps tomorrow, since the straight talker's campaign has already issued two different "clarifications" about his support (or is it opposition?) to the "mandatory" aspects of a cap-and-trade system.
McCain's energy plan? he got the concept from Jimmy Carter!!!
<table width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="postHeader">McCain Embraces Jimmy Carter’s Energy Policy
</td> <td align="right" valign="top" width="20">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
On Tuesday John McCain bravely told cheering Houston oil executives that the U.S. should encourage more domestic oil production, especially drilling off US coasts, a proposal the White House will now front even though its long-run effect would be minimal. [More on the offshore drilling proposal from Mother Jones, and CNN notes McCain's flip/flop (h/t Steve Benen at C&L)]McCain then embraced the rationale and basic elements of Jimmy Carter's energy policies from 30 years ago, policies that Reagan, Bush I and Bush II tried to starve.
As almost every US politician does today, McCain emphasized how our economic and national security are undermined by an overreliance on imported oil, especially from autocratic regimes hostile to the US. Carter gave a similar speech in the 1970s, except he wore a sweater and spoke next to a fireplace, while McCain spoke comfortably in an air conditioned room in one of the most air-conditioned cities of the US.
To end our oil addiction, Carter told the nation we should promote conservation, develop alternative energy sources and technologies, subsidize efforts to make coal-based energy cleaner, and rely much more on nuclear power. He proposed we begin to move away from reliance on imported oil by expanding domestic production and developing oil substitutes, such as liquid derivatives from coal. The same basic concepts were in McCain's speech yesterday.
Jimmy Carter faced another oil crisis, also caused by US meddling in the Middle East in ways that sparked the Iranian revolution, OPEC oil embargoes, and a doubling and quadrupling of world oil prices. Bush has presided over a five- to six-fold price increase. John McCain has finally come around to Carter's strategic assessment that our degree of dependence on oil is a danger to our security, but unlike Carter, McCain has not yet connected US military misadventures to our strategic energy vulnerabilities.
Thirty years ago, we realized that a critical piece of a sound energy policy is that the US should not start unnecessary, unprovoked wars in the Middle East. Promoting peace in the Middle East through negotiations among hostile parties made both security and energy sense. But McCain can't connect these dots without conceding Obama was right and admitting his own advocacy of invading Iraq was a huge blunder. He can't admit the link between today's volatile oil markets and his advocacy of the surge, sabre-rattling on Iran, and telling the Muslim world he plans to stay in Iraq for a hundred years.
And McCain didn't help matters with his intemperate condemnation of last week's Supreme Court ruling that people indiscriminately swept up in Bush's disastrous terror war and held indefinitely should be accorded the fundamental human right of having the government justify to an impartial tribunal why they're being held. He shares that disdain with those oil producing nations with authoritarian regimes. But their citizens know whose nationals were tortured and held at Gitmo and Bagram, and they know McCain says it's okay for the CIA and Bush to keep doing that.
McCain lamented today's high energy prices -- oil at $134/bbl, gas at over $4/gallon -- and noted predictions they could go much higher. But he never linked the necessity of high prices -- or taxes that might replicate them -- to the economic viability of his preferred alternatives.
Spending only two lines on energy conservation, his only near-term solution was the gas-tax holiday scheme. Gasoline prices have already risen more than the tax of 18.4 cents/gallon in the two months since he first proposed the idea. So if we'd done exactly what McCain advocated then, gas prices would be about where they are today, except imports would be higher, the oil producers would be billions richer and the Highway Trust Fund would be short about the same amount.
McCain also managed to misrepresent Obama's energy views on coal, taxes and climate change -- likely a major purpose of the speech -- but in the process he contradicted himself on global climate change, implying we should build more conventional coal plants. He did that by criticizing Obama for not advocating conventional coal, even though Obama, like McCain, consistently uses the terms "clean coal."
But don't worry about this confusion; there will likely be a clarification today or perhaps tomorrow, since the straight talker's campaign has already issued two different "clarifications" about his support (or is it opposition?) to the "mandatory" aspects of a cap-and-trade system.
We were trying to have a discussion in this here thread doc.
Do you have anything to add on what Obama's plan is or is this going back to the fuck bush, it's all roves fault, those nazis at fox news, illegal wars bullshit and cheney invested in the euro?
Add something to the thread instead of always being on the attack. Is that possible for you?
Do you have anything to add on what Obama's plan is or is this going back to the fuck bush, it's all roves fault, those nazis at fox news, illegal wars bullshit and cheney invested in the euro?
Add something to the thread instead of always being on the attack. Is that possible for you?
I personally agree with his pledge of $150B on new thechnologies over the next ten years. But that has to be supplemented with Nuclear and new drilling in the North America to get us some relief in the short-term. Of course, he can't talk drilling here (which over 80% of Americans think we should do) or Nuclear without antagonizing his base. Mr Hope and Change is More of the Same BS politician of the past.
If he really was Hope and Change, he would be centered and balance with a pragmatic approach to this very real problem. Come on BO you got the power to really be different.
If he really was Hope and Change, he would be centered and balance with a pragmatic approach to this very real problem. Come on BO you got the power to really be different.
Actually he proposes a comprehensive plan with long-term and short-term components. Off shore drilling is part of that short term program (along with Nuclear--which is very green if we can solve the by product waste)--almost every country in the world that has oil off its coast drills it--except the US. He also believes in a long-term new technology investment and thinks the US can be "off" oil competely by 2025.
I am not a huge McCain supporter, but his energy policy is comprehensive compared to BO's.
I am not a huge McCain supporter, but his energy policy is comprehensive compared to BO's.
Carter took over Nixons and Fords economic problems and Reagan went
behind his back with his "October Suprise" in which Reagan cut a deal
to hold the hostages to ensure the Election ...
and ghees ... the Hostages were released just about when Reagan
took office
Ya remember Reagan ... the old bastard who headed up the Iran Contra
scandal !!
behind his back with his "October Suprise" in which Reagan cut a deal
to hold the hostages to ensure the Election ...
and ghees ... the Hostages were released just about when Reagan
took office
Ya remember Reagan ... the old bastard who headed up the Iran Contra
scandal !!
i always enjoy how politicians are supposed to solve market problems like oil prices
you think these morons in washington have a clue about the oil markets LMAO
no wonder we are going down the tubes
americans always looking to government to fix shit when all they know how to do is fuck shit up and screw us the little guy over
you think these morons in washington have a clue about the oil markets LMAO
no wonder we are going down the tubes
americans always looking to government to fix shit when all they know how to do is fuck shit up and screw us the little guy over
