How stupid can O’bama rex be

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OldRegular, Apr 7, 2009.

  1. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    "Obama Touts U.S. Participation in Global Talks on Climate Change

    President Obama on Tuesday laid out his intentions for sweeping changes in how Americans use energy, conceding it will not be easy or popular, but noting that he wants the U.S. to participate in talks on the successor to the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol.


    If you say to a power plant, you have to produce energy in a different way, and that costs them money, then they want to pass that cost on to consumers, which means everybody's electricity prices go up -- and that is something that is not very popular,"he said.

    During his presidential campaign, Obama said utility bills would "skyrocket" beginning in 2012 when the policy would take effect. That's the same year the Kyoto Protocol expires and the document to come out of talks with the U.N. Climate Change Conference would go into effect."

    More Here


    How stupid can O’bama rex be? To tell power plants they have to produce energy a different way is utterly stupid. O’bama rex has ruled out nuclear power so where does he think the energy is going to come from. This is unreal, and the American people elected him president.
     
  2. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I stopped by to say two things OR... I don't really have a dog in this fight since in my view we need alternate energy in the cities but pollution is not that big a problem outside the big cities. I don't care as much about global warming as I do about pollution.

    1. One thing not being said is the government is subsidizing and in some cases absorbing the cost with the energy bucks in the stimulus plan. So it would be more like telling a power plant to convert and I will pay for it or you can keep your old technology and pay stiff penalties.

    2. I found out the numbers the Republican's used to show the average home bill increase was skewed a bit. The misinterpreted a study by MIT and said the cost to every American family would go up by $3,100 per year in higher energy prices. However, the truth according to MIT is they would go up about $340. This outraged MIT professor John Reilly who wrote Rep. John Boehner and other Republican's but they refuse to correct their figures.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/01/reilly-letter-to-boehner/

     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    Oh no! Think Progress says the GOP misinterpreted. We will all have a heart attack and die of surprised.
     
  4. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    2012? That's the year the earth is supposed to end according to the Mayan calendar. If that's the case, no worry over utility bills or the UN Climate Change Conference.
     
  5. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, Obama could kill, cook, and eat the octuplets...and I think LeBuick would defend it.
     
  6. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE ALTERNATE ENERGY SOURCE? That is what is so stupid about this entire green energy movement. Rule out Nuclear and there is not sufficient green energy.

    By the way does anyone know if Environmental Impact Statements were prepared for these wind turbine farms?
     
  7. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was just making sure to include he letter from MIT. The point was MIT didn't like how the republican's falsely used their study.
     
  8. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not defending anything in this thread, I just posted a couple of facts I had ran across. Like I said, I have no dog in this fight.

    Your analogy is kind of sick but I know it was humor and that you really don't think that low of me. So I will take it in the spirit it was given...
     
  9. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that is the point of investing to develop the alternative sources. My fear with nuclear plants is they would be a huge target for terrorist and I remember 3 mile island and trinoble.
     
  10. blackbird

    blackbird
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    11,898
    Likes Received:
    2
    I believe the big push from liberals is to wean ourselves off of fossil fuel generation

    Another big push is production of wind and water(hydro) power

    I don't have the information in front of me that will show the effeciency of fossel fuel plants-------but I can say----that untold billions have been spent and are still being spent for those kinds of plants to meet EPA standards for clean air---------my FIL works at EC Gaston fossil fuel plant in Wilsonville, AL and they "toe the line" with those standards

    in my opinion------The air that comes out of those stacks is cleaner than the air that smokers suck in to their lungs
     
  11. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I completely agree, one of the things not spoke of with the cap proposal is that every reputable power plant is far exceeding the standards outlined.

    Now the difference in wind is cost of production. The cost with wind is erecting the turbine. Oil has the cost of drilling the well then paying to pump, refine etc... I don't see us going completely to wind but if we can't get enough from wind that we no longer need foreign oil then I think it will be a huge success... IOW, let the alternative sources augment or reduce our usage of fossil fuels. This is why we need the smart grid.
     
  12. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obama the Man of the Millenium is now Obama the Eminent Scientist.

    He's ready to look into spewing pollution into the air to reflect heat.

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97ECHLG1&show_article=1

    I'm lost...wasn't this what Envirofascists were complaining about to start with?

    This president may not be an idiot, but he's a carrier.
     
  13. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    There is no comparison between Three mile Island and Chernoble. No one was hurt at Three Mile Island. Chernoble is still a wasteland.

    There really is no alternate energy source now other than nuclear and it would take 5-10 years to build and license one, depending on the environmental flakes.
     
  14. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Wind Turbines emit a very low frequency sound. Some folks living near these turbines are having problems with depression. Also the population of birds and bees is decreasing. No one knows why. We can probably do without birds but not the bees. That is the reason I asked if an Environmental Impact Statement had been written on Wind Turbines.
     
  15. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    This President is not an idiot. Now his predecessor. That's a different story. He was also an alcoholic.
     
  16. Milhous

    Milhous
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Provide proof that Bush was an idiot. Bush is an alcoholic (or recovering alcoholic) and Obama was a druggie (or if once a druggie always a druggie?) What is your point?

    I have seen Bush's college transcripts and he made decent grades. Better that John F. Kerry.

    I have never seen Obama's college transcripts. Until proven wrong, I will say Obama is ignorant about many things, including American History and Economics.
     
  17. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    No. Rbell is the expert on everything. NOT.
     
  18. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Excellent points. Welcome to the Board, by the way! :thumbs:

    Lady Eagle
     
  19. Milhous

    Milhous
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the welcome.
     
  20. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    President was a recovering alcoholic. We don't know what Obama is!
     
    #20 OldRegular, Apr 9, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 9, 2009

Share This Page

Loading...