|
Quote:
The article: Eventually we are goint to have to get off the carbon atom. Its just a matter of time. Nuclear power is the first viable alternative. If France produces 70-80% of their power using Nuclear why cant we?We produce more wind power in Texas than we can actually deliver so our two coal plants in San Antonio keep pumping along. And yes they cause bad air alerts, something that we never use to get. Asthmatics and allery sufferers have elevated effects with more crap in the air. The Carbon atom comes with other elements hanging off of it, even in the very cleanest coal and the sweetest crude. And it gets in the air. No one denies this. (I wont even get into the issue of greenhouse gases as this is still debatable as to how much effect humans have on climate.) I dont know if its the right time, or the right way to do it, but its pretty clear Obama wants us off the carbon atom. This article is obviously much more specific than what I am giving you. Ill-conceived taxes, promises broken, etc... As an aside we have had two kids die at our school due to asthma attacks. There is no PE on air alert days as both occurred on these days. We have (in this city) many more breathing related problems that we ever have after we put up additional turbines and Braunig and Calaveras Lakes (our coal plants). The article presents this carbon tax is the wrong way to do it. Fine. It does make sense.The alternative is... because we gotta get off the carbon atom. We have to. |
the list is long, some of the big ones that come to mind are:
Obama vowed to go line by line through the budget, and would not except wasteful earmarks. that was during the campaign. now he says he will sign this current budget that contains 9000 earmarks because "we need to move forward" during the campaign he made a huge deal how he would not hire lobbyists and that he would have none in his Whitehouse. the fact is at last count he has made 19 exceptions to this ironclad promise. the timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is the one the Petraeus outlined some time back under Bush. Obama has added nothing to this matter other than make a big press conference and announce it pubicly and take credit for keeping his campaign pledge, which he didn't. he did at one point advocate a much faster timetable. he made a big deal recently announcing that he was redirecting a particular strike force, that had been training for missions in Iraq for months, to Afghanistan. this was supposedly another campaign promise kept, to pull out of Iraq and re-focus on Afghanistan. a week later and quite quietly it has been discovered that another identical strike squad will be sent to Iraq in order to replace the one that was redirected to Afghanistan. so, the bottom line is that he played a shell game to make it look like he was drawing down in Iraq. |
Quote:
Just dropping by....nuclear power and desalinization plants are the way to go for the future,imho. This is forward planning.... |
Quote:
81 of them to = 1 small coal fired or steam turbine |
Quote:
He said on more than one occasion that he would immediately withdraw the troops from Iraq usually followed up by wild cheering and him taking bows. I guess his version of immediate changed once the reality of the situation hit him. You think he has acted bipartisan? Exactly what has he done that would be considered remotely bipartisan? Even the most liberal of liberals would have a hard time keeping a straight face on that one. What do you mean we will see on #4 and #5? Do you ever actually read a paper other than the USA today? He has already taken the same stance as the Bush administration has on Executive power through his Justice Dept. And earmarks? LOL I suppose that you missed the budget last week.....Yeah he'll get bipartisan tough on those....yeah sure he will |
Quote:
I'm willing to wait and see how Obama handles the next budget. The first real budget that will be within his scope as President (this one was created before he was elected) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Cannon said, "Do I have to make a list of things Obama or any other politician has said that they either have done a 180 degree reversal on or were simply not true? His ACTIONS speak louder than his words" I don't see a complete lie or failure in the least. I see a very intelligent man trying very hard, in very difficult times, to adhere to and implement the course and idealogy he promised. I am not very liberal, have always been GOP, but voted for Obama and am darn glad he's President versus McCain and Caribou Barbie. Do I support everything Obama wanted to do? Nope. Do I support the entire Democratic platform? Not in the least. I find a few planks downright scary. Did I figure, when I voted, that Obama wouldn't be able to do some of his campaign promises over his eight years for this reason or that? Yup. Like all the other Presidents I've voted for. Do I hold every candidate to every single campaign promise if elected? No. Things change. Do I want Obama to fail? Of course not - that would be stupid and ridiculous for my country. Our country is in too big a mess to put partisan politics before country. I want Obama to succeed. Greatly and impressively and repeatedly. I find Limbaugh-like partisan nitpicking, a couple months into Obama's Presidency, the obvious Obama-hate, outside of discussion of these terrifying and major issues we have, and discussion of possible various solutions, to be narrow-minded anti-country idiocy. I have lived through several Presidents I haven't voted for. The election of two of them was downright scary to me. One supports the country, and the President, and goes forward. |
Quote:
Do you ever listen to anything other than Fox News? |
Quote:
81 of them. That is much better than I thought. So you were told they are producing more energy than we can carry via wire, eh? ANd What the heck are you doing there birthday boy? Out in beautiful West Texas? Or are you in the middle/up to panhandle area? |
Quote:
Sure I listen to all sorts of things. Why is that anyone that refuses to follow along the liberal path is considered Rush Limbaugh or Fox News junkies? Do you read the Economist?. Or the Wall Street Journal? Or Financial Times or Money or Inc or Kiplingers or watch CNN or Cnbc or Fox business or a million other shows that are both liberal and conservative? Hell come to the table with something other than the typical liberal rhetoric about Fox news. next thing you'll tell me that the mainstream media isnt left leaning... |
Wind farms have some of their own serious concerns regarding environmental impact (birds, bats, etc). Yes, I find them ugly, btw.
I agree, we need far less coal dependency. And the end result of nuclear power is steam. |
Quote:
Obama is nothing but a liberal politican trying to enact a sweeping social agenda and using the politcal cover of economic problems to cover his tracks. That should make him the target of scorn and ridicule for putting his ideology over the best interests of the country. Some of arent fooled by press conference quotes and PR. The proof is in the pudding and his pudding tastes like ****. |
Quote:
Do you see everyone that doesn't agree with you as a liberal? I don't see it as black and white as you seem to. Yes, I read WSJ almost daily, and hit on Money or Inc when I can. I watch CNN, CNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC. I sometimes even look at Huffington Post and Fox News (there's two extremes). Yes, I think the general media leans more left than right. I consider Fox News a completely crappy, laughable and factually unreliable "news" organization. They are a 24-hour ultra-conservative politically-motived blog. I would no more get my "news" from Fox than I would Huff Post. Yes, I find them both useful for editorial content views. |
Quote:
I mean before you said Obama was too busy with his job to do his job (you know actually read the budget and eliminate those pesky earmarks that he said he was going to) But he isnt too busy to try to start projects that put a financial strain on the people of the country with no actual tangible benefits? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I dont how anyone could read the Wall Street Journal daily and still come up with your viewpoint which seem to be far closer to the general media than anything found in the WSJ. I dont call everyone that doesnt agree with me a liberal. I call liberal thinking and actions liberal. Because NBC says something is objective doesnt mean it is. |
Quote:
Obama has taken a bad situation and is making it much worse. I would be only laughing at the situation if it we weren't so close to financial collapse. btw, here is another laugh, regarding this most ethical of administrations. they claimed paying taxes was patriotic. we find ourselves with an economic disaster. they claim to know what to do because they will put their big brains on the case. only one problem, the department we need up and running right now to fight this war is the treasury. the treasury is off to a sputtering start because its run by a tax cheating incompetent, and surprise surprise, they're not staffed yet because they can't find people without tax issues!!! you can't make this stuff up. they have to outsource some of the trade missions now to the State department because Geithner is swamped. one more guffaw for tonight. this bestest most smartest president in history yesterday said he wanted to reach out to Taliban moderates. WTF is he smoking? yeah how about reaching out to moderate maniacs, and moderate muderers while we're at it. i guess if appearing weak and stupid on the world stage (hit the reset button with Russia?), while tripling the deficit and plunging headlong into a depression, while trying to erect a utopian socialist society is partisan nit-picking, then yes I'm guilty as charged. fyi- I don't like nascar and I'm not religious. I saw your stereotypes yesterday. |
dont mean to get in the way fellas
the wall street journal and the economist have really good stuff. the economist has some very wide ranging issues presented that tie a lot of stuff together. wish it came out more often. wall street journal does a cracker-jack job of putting foreign affairs and business together. |
actually Riot these two conservative posters
are not your social conservatives, they are economic conservatives Probably two of the few that realize their party dies when they get off tangent on social issues. Sad they need that base to pull off an election. McCain was not rabid enough. He told a racist hillbilly to shut up at a Rep pep rally and it was seen as a mistake... go figure. |
Quote:
and every person in the country can become MR and Mrs Green and we can all do every thing we could possible thing for the environment and it wont mean a damn thing when China doesnt give a **** and refused to change their policies. It wont help if everyone isnt doing it. It hasnt helped in europe. We have bigger issues right now. |
Quote:
the perfect example of what happens when industry runs awry. They are basically poisoning themselves. Their life expectancy has gone down and they are richer. Imagine that. This is why Obama has stated he wants to do this now. It probably would have gone better when gas was > 4.00 but it will eventually go back. He believes this is the time to make the switch. Its a gamble. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.