whats that word you are looking for???

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ne...f_mccain__obama_quiet_on_own_energy_vote.html

says 'the One'....

"President Bush, he had an energy policy. He turned to Dick Cheney and he said, 'Cheney, go take care of this,'" Obama said. "Cheney met with renewable-energy folks once and oil and gas (executives) 40 times. McCain has taken a page out of the Cheney playbook."

In stumping Tuesday in this key battleground state, Obama sought to link the troubled economy with Republican policies and offer his own energy plan in contrast. He has tried to cast McCain as more concerned about oil company profits and drilling than an overall energy strategy.

However, Obama himself voted for a 2005 energy bill backed by Bush that included billions in subsidies for oil and natural gas production, a measure Cheney played a major role in developing. McCain opposed the bill on grounds it included billions in unnecessary tax breaks for the oil industry.

Ooops.... the word you are looking for is hypocrit.

 

[Epicurus]

Actually it's "hypocritE".

 

[Onceler]

Yeah, but your Messiah, he...he voted for something that he had denounced and said bad things about, also, and your Messiah does the same thing, and your Messiah, he...he's a hypocrite, too, so you shouldn't even be starting threads like this & noticing things like this, unless you...you're a good little lemming, too.

But please; keep on noticing when the person you don't like does something and please, keep not noticing when your Messiah, he...he does the same thing....

 

[blackascoal]

Actually it's "hypocritE".

Actually it's hypocritter,

Obama is a hypocritter.

 

[Onceler]

Honestly, I don't think the right-wing hacks on this board (present company included) know what to do with the fact that the liberal posters here have been outspoken in their criticism & disillusionment with Obama.

It's something they wouldn't have dared done with Bush before he was a lame duck, and they won't dare do with McCain. It doesn't compute in their teensy little brains, so they start threads like this one, which are basically textbook examples of psychological projection.

 

[Epicurus]

All of your Obama bashing is a bit premature, IMO.

Have you guys never watched an election before or something? Democrats run to the left for the primaries then to the center for the general.

Neither has much relevancy on what their presidency will look like, though. For that we will just have to wait and see.

 

[blackascoal]

Honestly, I don't think the right-wing hacks on this board (present company included) know what to do with the fact that the liberal posters here have been outspoken in their criticism & disillusionment with Obama.

It's something they wouldn't have dared done with Bush before he was a lame duck, and they won't dare do with McCain. It doesn't compute in their teensy little brains, so they start threads like this one, which are basically textbook examples of psychological projection.

You are genius my brother.

 

[cawacko]

Honestly, I don't think the right-wing hacks on this board (present company included) know what to do with the fact that the liberal posters here have been outspoken in their criticism & disillusionment with Obama.

It's something they wouldn't have dared done with Bush before he was a lame duck, and they won't dare do with McCain. It doesn't compute in their teensy little brains, so they start threads like this one, which are basically textbook examples of psychological projection.

I think SF was pretty accurate in his initial post but that is just par for the course in politics. As we all know perception pretty much trumps reality. On this board we are all political junkies so we catch all the B.S. But to millions of people who don't follow this stuff like we do but still vote it must work.

While I'm supporting McCain in this election I'm no big fan of his. And as I wrote ealier today it would probably be best for the Republicans to lose this election and then work towards rebuilding itself and finding some new leadership. McCain doesn't excite me. While he's trending right trying to win over the conservative base if he wins I don't think he will govern that way.

 

[Cypress]

Honestly, I don't think the right-wing hacks on this board (present company included) know what to do with the fact that the liberal posters here have been outspoken in their criticism & disillusionment with Obama.

It's something they wouldn't have dared done with Bush before he was a lame duck, and they won't dare do with McCain. It doesn't compute in their teensy little brains, so they start threads like this one, which are basically textbook examples of psychological projection.

I've never seen Cons on this board, or any other, have long extended threads or discussions about how extremely lame Bush, McCain and Cheney are. And they are orders of magnitude more lame than Obama and Evan Bayh.

Occassionally, they'll chirp a criticism here and there. But, there's nothing the compares to the crap I and others heap on Obama, Clinton, and other democrats.

Why is that?

 

[ib1yysguy]

I've never seen Cons on this board, or any other, have long extended threads or discussions about how extremely lame Bush, McCain and Cheney are. And they are orders of magnitude more lame than Obama and Evan Bayh.

Occassionally, they'll chirp a criticism here and there. But, there's nothing the compares to the crap I and others heap on Obama, Clinton, and other democrats.

Why is that?

It's the same reason they don't have to worry about courting different parts of the Republican party. They know they're never going to vote for anyone but a Republican. That's probably got something to do with the fact that they're not critically thinking individuals, by and large. Either that, or they've got their single issue that they're obsessed with and will selfishly never vote against it.

 

[Cypress]

It's the same reason they don't have to worry about courting different parts of the Republican party. They know they're never going to vote for anyone but a Republican. That's probably got something to do with the fact that they're not critically thinking individuals, by and large. Either that, or they've got their single issue that they're obsessed with and will selfishly never vote against it.

that makes sense.

But you could have been less verbose, and just said that they're partisan hacks.

 

[Bonestorm]

What I find interesting are the two candidates' press releases on their votes on the Energy Bill.

First, McCain:

June 28, 2005

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl today voted against Senate passage of H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005, warning that it is not the solution that some have suggested and will actually result in higher gas prices for Arizonans.

The bill contains numerous provisions that will distort competitive markets for energy through subsidies, tax breaks, special projects, mandates and outlandish amounts of federal spending, and it is unlikely to have any positive short-term effect on energy prices.

"This bill does little to address the immediate energy crisis we face in this country. The handouts to big business and oil companies are irresponsible and will be disastrous for people of Arizona. I cannot in good conscience, vote to pass legislation that does not adequately address issues related to energy efficiency, security, and energy independence," said McCain.

One example from the bill that is harmful to Arizona is the mandate that Americans use eight billion gallons of ethanol annually by 2012. Currently, Americans consume only 3.4 billion gallons. Such mandates will result in higher gasoline costs for states, like Arizona, that do not have an abundant in-state supply of renewable energy or who do not produce their own ethanol.

"I predict that if this bill is enacted, gas prices in Arizona will increase and air quality will be impaired because of its ethanol mandates," said Kyl. "The bill does little to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and will impose huge new costs on Arizona power consumers because of the bill's national one-size-fits-all renewable portfolio standard."

The bill also includes overly-generous tax incentives for individuals to buy alternative fuel vehicles. Both Senators noted Arizona's disastrous experience a few years ago with its alternative fuel vehicle tax incentives. Arizona's program could have cost state taxpayers half a billion dollars - 11 percent of the state's budget - if it had not been repealed. Originally projected costs of the Arizona program were between $3 million and $10 million - less than 10 percent of its true cost.

McCain and Kyl noted that with any bill of this size, there are both good and bad provisions. And though they praise the bill's reliability standards and incentives for new refinery capacity, they concluded that the bad just outweighed the good.

And for Obama:

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Barack Obama Friday voted in favor of the comprehensive energy bill, saying it will help Illinois and start America down the path to energy independence by doubling ethanol use, greatly increasing the availability of E85 ethanol pumps, and investing in combination plug-in hybrid and flexible-fuel vehicles, as well as clean-coal technology. However, he warned that bolder action is required if lawmakers are really serious about dealing with the high energy costs that are plaguing American consumers.

"This bill, while far from a solution, is a first step toward decreasing America's dependence on foreign oil," said Obama. "It requires that 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol be mixed with gasoline by 2012. That's 7.5 billion gallons of fuel that will be grown in the corn fields of Illinois, and not imported from the deserts of the Middle East. The bill will also help triple the number of E85 ethanol fueling stations in the next year by providing a tax credit for their construction. This will help the millions of people who already drive flexible-fuel vehicles to fill their tanks with fuel made from 85 percent ethanol that is 50 cents cheaper than regular gasoline."

"I am also pleased that the bill includes funding I requested for research into combination plug-in hybrid and flexible fuel vehicles that could travel up to 500 miles per gallon of gasoline, as well as more investment into clean-coal technology."

The Energy bill will do the following:

- Create a Renewable Fuels Standard that will nearly double the amount of ethanol used by 2012.

- Provide up to a $30,000 tax credit for the construction of E85 ethanol fueling stations.

- Provide a $1.8 billion tax credit for investments in clean-coal facilities.

- Provide $85 million to Southern Illinois University, Purdue University, and the University of Kentucky for research and testing on developing Illinois basin coal into transportation fuels.

- Provide $40 million for research on combined plug-in hybrid and E85 flexible fuel vehicles that have the potential to drive 500 miles per gallon of gasoline used.

- Provide incentives to promote biofuels from agricultural resources.

While voting for the bill, the Illinois Senator also said he believes that the legislation still falls short of what could and should be done to put America on the path to energy independence.

"Although this a step forward, it's not a very big step," said Obama. "The Department of Energy predicts that American demand will jump by 50 percent over the next 15 years. Meanwhile, the conservative Heritage Foundation says this bill will do virtually nothing to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. And it won't reduce the price of gasoline paid by hardworking Americans. Even President Bush and supporters of the bill in Congress concede as much."

"We could have done more today, and we should do more in the future. We must accept and embrace the challenge of finding a solution to our dependence on foreign oil as one of the most pressing problems of our time. It won't be easy and it won't be without sacrifice, but we owe it to ourselves and to our children so that we can bring down gas prices, protect our environment, and strengthen our national security. This should be one of our top priorities in America."

"So, I vote for this bill reluctantly today, disappointed that we have missed our opportunity to do something bolder that would have put us on the path to energy independence. This bill should be the first step, not the last, in our journey towards energy independence."