[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
I suspect what RP is talking about when he mentions technology is the liquefaction of coal. Coal can be turned into a liquid. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. I think we're smart enough to do it. Technology is improving all the time. If oil goes to $150 a barrel because we've bombed Iran, coal might be something that we can become more independent with. I think technology is super, and we are capable of knowing how to use coal without polluting other people's property. Paul is also against a carbon tax, so what Obama says about coal is in direct opposition to Paul's stance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry has been kept under wraps until this time. UPDATE: NewsBusters' Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here when you scroll down to the In His Own Words section. Way to cover up for The One, SF Chronicle!
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, aztjbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suspect what RP is talking about when he mentions technology is the liquefaction of coal. Coal can be turned into a liquid. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. I think we're smart enough to do it. Technology is improving all the time. If oil goes to $150 a barrel because we've bombed Iran, coal might be something that we can become more independent with. I think technology is super, and we are capable of knowing how to use coal without polluting other people's property. Paul is also against a carbon tax, so what Obama says about coal is in direct opposition to Paul's stance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry has been kept under wraps until this time. UPDATE: NewsBusters' Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of boo_lives Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 9:34 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. Clean coal technology is a long way off. It involves pumping CO2 into the ground, from where it might eventually bubble up into people's basements and kill them, or piping or trucking it long distances so it can be pumped into the ground elsewhere. Seems to me that decentralized power is the wave of the future. Solar panels on every rooftop and personal wind turbines where practical. This would eliminate so many infrastructure hurdles.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
With RP you would get the opportunity to explore clean coal technology. McCain might pay it lip service, and really just take his orders from the big companies, back pedaling any concept of innovation. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, aztjbailey aztjbailey@ wrote: I suspect what RP is talking about when he mentions technology is the liquefaction of coal. Coal can be turned into a liquid. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. I think we're smart enough to do it. Technology is improving all the time. If oil goes to $150 a barrel because we've bombed Iran, coal might be something that we can become more independent with. I think technology is super, and we are capable of knowing how to use coal without polluting other people's property. Paul is also against a carbon tax, so what Obama says about coal is in direct opposition to Paul's stance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama about
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. Do you agree with Barky Hussein that such plants should go out of business because of the prohibitively high carbon taxes he says he will impose on them? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, aztjbailey aztjbailey@ wrote: I suspect what RP is talking about when he mentions technology is the liquefaction of coal. Coal can be turned into a liquid. http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.html http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2005/07/about_coal_liqu.htm l --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. I think we're smart enough to do it. Technology is improving all the time. If oil goes to $150 a barrel because we've bombed Iran, coal might be something that we can become more independent with. I think technology is super, and we are capable of knowing how to use coal without polluting other people's property. Paul is also against a carbon tax, so what Obama says about coal is in direct opposition to Paul's stance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. What type of brain damage causes you to be so dumb Shemp? Coal should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody --- Ron Paul. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives boo_lives@ wrote: I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. Do you agree with Barky Hussein that such plants should go out of business because of the prohibitively high carbon taxes he says he will impose on them? New Flash shemp, Sidney also is in favor of carbon taxes, it was the central focus of his climate change talk. The goal of carbon taxes is to provide a financial incentive for coal users and entrepreneurs to develop cleaner coal technologies. It's already happening slowly, but carbon taxes speeds the process. The purpose of carbon taxes is not to put plants out of business, it's to change the technology that plants use to burn coal, to make the dirty coal tech. obsolete. The tax is structured so that no plant goes out of business, but gradually new tech. come in. Economists have been thinking about carbon taxes for awhile and in all the models utilities are not put out of business, it's the old technologies that get put out of business gradually. here's Obama quote on the subject that drudge forgot: The point is, if we set rigorous standards for the allowable emissions, then we can allow the market to determine and technology and entrepreneurs to pursue what the best approach is to take, as opposed to us saying at the outset here are the winners that we're picking and maybe we pick wrong and maybe we pick right. I'm glad to know shemp favors dirty coal technology and doesn't favor entrepreneurship to solve env't problems. OF course, shemp doesn't believe in climate change, so that makes sense but even mccain believes in climate change and carbon taxes. Don't fret shemp, Palin in 2012, and you'll have someone in line with your thinking.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] New Flash shemp, Sidney also is in favor of carbon taxes, it was the central focus of his climate change talk. [snip] SO WHY THE FUCK SHOULD I CARE? LISTEN, YOU ADDLE-BRAINED SPAWN OF SHEEPLE, JUST BECAUSE I CAN'T STAND THE MARXIST COMMUNITY ORGANISER DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MEAN I SUPPORT McCAIN. I DON'T. NOW KINDLY FUCK OFF AND START TO THINK FOR YOURSELF INSTEAD OF LIKE A KOOL-AID DRINKING OBAMA-BOT.
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. What type of brain damage causes you to be so dumb Shemp? Coal should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody --- Ron Paul. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. OffWorld Schmuck-face, of coure it has to be used without ever hurting anyone. That's so obvious, no one needs to say it. But it's such a Mom-and- apple-pie-statement and so innoculous that only an idiot like you would pick up on it. It's like saying: I am opposed to unhappiness and I stand for happiness. But Paul is still 100% on the opposite side of the fence from Obama who is for a carbon tax and Paul is against it (that's why you conveniently snipped that part of my post).
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think there are any plants anywhere using coal that have zero emissions. We should explore clean coal technology but right now it's just a phrase, not a reality. There's cleaner coal than before but not clean. The cost of these clean technologies has to include all the attendant technologies and other costs/subsidies used to create them. That's why nuclear isn't as cheap as people think it is, nor ethanol, nor gasoline. On the other hand, solar thermal farming, for all its space-wasting issues, may be cheap enough already, to be of use without any subsidies whatsoever. The only special cost for solar thermal farming is construction costs, much of it in the form of energy to melt the sand to make the glass panels. It has the added bonus that since the primary component is sand, there's not too much danger of running out of the needed raw materials, unlike solar cell technology, which often uses the same rare earths used to make computer chips. Imagine if there were so many solar cells being made that they impacted the price of new computer chips. It is a definite possibility. Solar thermal farming is where its at, at least in sunny places, IMHO. And Adriene and Marjorie Meinel proved that you could supply the energy needs of the USA in 2070 using 1970 technology, based on energy cost projections that were NOT taking the current price of gas into account. In fact, energy in the US is probably already at their projected 2070 levels, cost-wise. Here's hoping that Obama is able to start his public works programs and get massive construction of solar farms int he southwest. The Dineh ( Navajo Nation) would benefit greatly if the farms were built on the tribal lands, killing two birds with one stone by providing an incentive and funds for a lot of Original Peoples to get high tech degrees to run the operations instead of casinos (not that the Dineh live close enough to population centers to run them anyway) while creating a huge non-carbon-footprint contributor to our nation's power grid. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. What type of brain damage causes you to be so dumb Shemp? Coal should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody --- Ron Paul. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. OffWorld Schmuck-face, of coure it has to be used without ever hurting anyone. That's so obvious, no one needs to say it. But it's such a Mom-and- apple-pie-statement and so innoculous that only an idiot like you would pick up on it. It's like saying: I am opposed to unhappiness and I stand for happiness. But Paul is still 100% on the opposite side of the fence from Obama who is for a carbon tax and Paul is against it You moron, that is like saying a muslim that believes in Allah is a different belief than a christian that believes in Jehova. The both believe in God, and only morons think there is any difference. Ron Paul states that it is unconstitional to pollute someone, and also to tax someone. The bottom line is the same for Obama and for Paul: If you pollute, you pay, and their attitude to coal is identical, unlike old-school brainless fools like you, who is irrational and has no understanding of the world. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. If you pollute, you pay - Obama/Paul. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry has been kept under wraps until this time. UPDATE: NewsBusters' Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here when you scroll down to the In His Own Words section. Way to cover up for The One, SF Chronicle!
[FairfieldLife] Re: This should secure the Pennsylvania and West Virginia vote for Barky
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lol...Idiot republicans ACTUALLY THINK this is bad for Obama ! The coal industry is already doing what Obama suggested here. Even they are moving into greener technologies with zero emmissions plants. Its as if they are in lock step together in their vision for the future with Obama, and the people in those States are well aware of that. Its only idiots like you and the other republicans, that the coal industry has already left behind, are still part of the old school dustbin of history. OffWorld I guess I'm an idiot along with RON PAUL, your hero! Ha! Here's what Paul has to say about coal: What role do you think coal should play in America's energy future? Coal is a source of energy, and it should be used, but it has to be used without ever hurting anybody. I think we're smart enough to do it. Technology is improving all the time. If oil goes to $150 a barrel because we've bombed Iran, coal might be something that we can become more independent with. I think technology is super, and we are capable of knowing how to use coal without polluting other people's property. Paul is also against a carbon tax, so what Obama says about coal is in direct opposition to Paul's stance. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com , shempmcgurk shempmcgurk@ wrote: http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 http://tinyurl.com/68oyz4 Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By P.J. Gladnick (Bio | Archive) November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET (Please read update about the San Francisco Chronicle neglecting to mention Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry at bottom of this blog.) Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine): Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, 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. Story Continues Below Ad « That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them. Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry has been kept under wraps until this time. UPDATE: NewsBusters' Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama's willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here when you scroll down to the In His Own Words section. Way to cover up for The One, SF Chronicle!
