0
   

Obama to Coal Country: I will bankrupt you

 
 
Reply Tue 4 Nov, 2008 02:20 am
The Loft

As the election draws to a close, a fierce battle is being fought in swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Colorado. Obama is traveling around promising the moon, and no one is questioning him on what his policies will actually do. He promises a tax cut for 95% of Americans. They think it sounds great, but don't realize that the promise is completely false. He promises cuts in spending, but has never mentioned programs that he'd actually cut.

Obama has never run an organization, a business, or a state, yet he wants to run the country. He is not driven by the entrepreneurial spirit that has built America, but rather by a socialist agenda that seeks to make America less free and more reliant on government. In particular, a radio interview with Obama has surfaced which shows just how out of touch he is with the people and communities (many in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and Colorado) who rely on the coal industry for jobs and energy. As Obama said in interviews not covered by the media, he seeks to "bankrupt" the coal industry and put together policies that will make electricity prices "skyrocket."


In a radio interview on January 17, 2008 with the San Francisco Chronicle, Sen. Obama described his energy plan, saying "So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted." You can listen to it here:

__________________________________

click for the rest.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,227 • Replies: 20
No top replies

 
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Nov, 2008 03:24 am
@Drnaline,
Ah, one cherry picked quote and you have a "scandal".

Let's nuke this one fast.

This is what Obama said:

That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants are being built, they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted-down caps that are imposed every year. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted. That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel, and other alternative energy approaches.

Seems that is McCain's posture as well.

Voinovich told McCain that his legislation would "put coal of out of business." McCain agreed that his legislation would "require sacrifice" acknowledging that critics said it would cost "thousands of jobs." Nonetheless, McCain (correctly) stood by his legislation, and even said that he wanted a tougher set of rules.

Voinovich:

On one side of this debate, there are proposals to create a mandatory domestic program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as the amendment that will be proposed by Senator McCain, to my understanding, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

It is my understanding that the amendment, according to Charles Rivers Associates, which analyzed its provisions, would cause the loss of 24,000 to 47,000 Ohio jobs, in 2010, and energy-intensive industries to shrink by 2.3 to 5.6 percent in 2020. We are talking about manufacturing industries, energy-intensive manufacturing and chemical and many others.

The McCain amendment will put coal out of business by forcing fuel switching to natural gas.



Mick's response?

Does it involve some sacrifice on the part of the American people? Yes. ... This amendment, I am sure, will be attacked--thousands of jobs will be lost, we will find some obscure scientist, some will talk about the dangers of encouraging the use of nuclear power. The fact is, we are going to win on this issue. The reason we are going to win is because every single month there is another manifestation of the terrible effects of what climate change is doing to our Earth.

See Sanchez, this is why I point to your right-wing bloggers all the time. No real facts to their claims. Ever. Better yet, they keep throwing boomerangs... what they throw out usually smacks them right in their own face.
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Tue 4 Nov, 2008 03:43 am
@Drnaline,
I am honestly amazed at how fast you lockstepped with this non-story.
0 Replies
 
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2008 04:48 pm
@Sabz5150,
Sabz5150;62187 wrote:
Ah, one cherry picked quote and you have a "scandal".


You didn't seem to have a problem cherry picking Palin over her knowledge of Nafta. You don't seem to have a problem with Obama not knowing how many states he's the president of.
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2008 09:24 pm
@g-man,
g-man;63223 wrote:
You didn't seem to have a problem cherry picking Palin over her knowledge of Nafta. You don't seem to have a problem with Obama not knowing how many states he's the president of.


There's no cherry picking there. Palin did not know the countries that comprise NAFTA. That is hilariously pathetic. She lives in one and her state borders another. There's only one more left. Can't be that hard.

But what does this have to do with quote mining and outright lies purported by Sanchez and his rightwingosphere blogs?

Sounds like somebody really is sore... just throwing wild haymakers, hoping one connects.

Not this time, kiddo.
0 Replies
 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Dec, 2008 06:44 am
@g-man,
g-man;63223 wrote:
You didn't seem to have a problem cherry picking Palin over her knowledge of Nafta. You don't seem to have a problem with Obama not knowing how many states he's the president of.


We both know that he misspoke, but if you really want to play that card we can talk about McCain's geography error as well. :thumbup:
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Dec, 2008 07:17 am
@Drnaline,
Oh, and don't forget "International Space Shuttle". I was at NASA when he flubbed that one.
0 Replies
 
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 03:53 pm
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63236 wrote:
We both know that he misspoke, but if you really want to play that card we can talk about McCain's geography error as well. :thumbup:


No, "you" know that he mis-spoke. For you, any excuse will do.
I suspect that he is ignorant.
You can say what you want about McCain. I know that he has suffered as a true hero. Someone who Obama is not worthy to stand in a room with, without humility.
I do not consider McCain the best to be president of the U.S.. But, Obama?
I'll let you proclaim his qualifications. Name them. Other than "change"....?
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2009 09:29 pm
@g-man,
g-man;63466 wrote:
No, "you" know that he mis-spoke. For you, any excuse will do.
I suspect that he is ignorant.
You can say what you want about McCain. I know that he has suffered as a true hero. Someone who Obama is not worthy to stand in a room with, without humility.
I do not consider McCain the best to be president of the U.S.. But, Obama?
I'll let you proclaim his qualifications. Name them. Other than "change"....?


The man gets it. That's his qualification. He knows what the people want, and most importantly he knows how to reach them. The people, in turn, swing that lever. It's that simple.
0 Replies
 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2009 02:04 am
@g-man,
g-man;63466 wrote:
No, "you" know that he mis-spoke. For you, any excuse will do.
I suspect that he is ignorant.
You can say what you want about McCain. I know that he has suffered as a true hero. Someone who Obama is not worthy to stand in a room with, without humility.
I do not consider McCain the best to be president of the U.S.. But, Obama?
I'll let you proclaim his qualifications. Name them. Other than "change"....?


Give me a ******* break, he went to Columbia university and Harvard Law school and you think it's more likely he doesn't know how many states there is than that he simply misspoke!? This speaks loudly about the length of self-delusion you will go to smear and slander someone with who you disagree.
0 Replies
 
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 08:57 am
@Drnaline,
You think that college education is all the experience one should have to preside over a nation that has been built by the working class and great risk taking people? Hmmmph
One who has demeaned great people and offered nothing more than vague promises of equality and peace and harmony?
His appointments to positions such as CIA and IRS have already exposed that he cares for nothing more than political correctness. A tax evader for the IRS and a front man for the CIA.
Feel free to debunk any accusation I make toward this clown. There will be many.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 09:05 am
@g-man,
g-man;63546 wrote:
You think that college education is all the experience one should have to preside over a nation that has been built by the working class and great risk taking people?


It's certainly enough to know how many ******* states there are.
0 Replies
 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Jan, 2009 09:06 am
@g-man,
g-man;63546 wrote:

His appointments to positions such as CIA and IRS have already exposed that he cares for nothing more than political correctness. A tax evader for the IRS and a front man for the CIA.
Feel free to debunk any accusation I make toward this clown. There will be many.


The burden of proof is on you.
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Jan, 2009 01:32 pm
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63548 wrote:
The burden of proof is on you.


Wrong. politicians are fair game. Obama is simply one that will provide much fodder. It's going to be fun.

I can't think of the article, but appointing Hillary to a cabinet post, is illegal.
I'll provide the article when I can find it. Three strikes on this creep and he hasn't even put his hand on Abraham Lincoln's (R-Ill) bible.
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 06:11 am
@g-man,
g-man;63565 wrote:
Wrong. politicians are fair game. Obama is simply one that will provide much fodder. It's going to be fun.

I can't think of the article, but appointing Hillary to a cabinet post, is illegal.
I'll provide the article when I can find it. Three strikes on this creep and he hasn't even put his hand on Abraham Lincoln's (R-Ill) bible.


Where was all this when W was burning the Constitution?

Oh that's right... God and all. Gotcha.

Well, you have the right to be a moonbat. At least I have the right to call you out on it.
0 Replies
 
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 08:39 am
@g-man,
g-man;63565 wrote:
Wrong. politicians are fair game. Obama is simply one that will provide much fodder. It's going to be fun.

I can't think of the article, but appointing Hillary to a cabinet post, is illegal.
I'll provide the article when I can find it. Three strikes on this creep and he hasn't even put his hand on Abraham Lincoln's (R-Ill) bible.


Nope, i'm pretty sure the burden of proof is still on you.

A) Make claim
B) Provide evidence

You've got part A down to a science, but not so good at part B.
Sabz5150
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Jan, 2009 09:18 pm
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63581 wrote:
Nope, i'm pretty sure the burden of proof is still on you.

A) Make claim
B) Provide evidence

You've got part A down to a science, but not so good at part B.



Remember how their minds work. To them, they are right and must be proven wrong. They don't understand that if they make a claim, it's their job to back it up.

Case in point: Religion.

EDIT: Sorry for the edit Fatal... pressed the wrong button Sad
0 Replies
 
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jan, 2009 05:32 pm
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63581 wrote:
Nope, i'm pretty sure the burden of proof is still on you.

A) Make claim
B) Provide evidence

You've got part A down to a science, but not so good at part B.


Part B is court related. If proof were a factor and anyone gave a ****, Barry would still be a senator.
Fatal Freedoms
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2009 06:01 am
@g-man,
g-man;63671 wrote:
Part B is court related. If proof were a factor and anyone gave a ****, Barry would still be a senator.


evidence =/= proof


:rollinglaugh:
g-man
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Feb, 2009 05:43 pm
@Fatal Freedoms,
Fatal_Freedoms;63696 wrote:
evidence =/= proof


:rollinglaugh: Which Barry can't or won't provide.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama to Coal Country: I will bankrupt you
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/16/2021 at 01:59:47