Posted on 06/16/2010 12:55:53 AM PDT by tlb
Obama could have called for a “moon shot” tonight to make a transition from fossil fuels to cleaner energy, and he failed to do that. He made his first-ever speech in the Oval Office, and he had all three networks at the 8 p.m. slot, and he didn’t make good use of it.
The speech was flat and uninspiring. He recited a litany of the things the administration has done to try to bring the spill under control, but it was a rehash of things the public has already heard. Yes, he’s going to make BP pay. That’s good — as far as it goes. But he didn’t use the moment to assert a resolute sense of command.
Nor did he use it to call on Americans to make the sacrifices that will be necessary to make the transition from petroleum to cleaner fuels. Yes, he said a little about it. But he didn’t even endorse the energy bill currently languishing in the Senate.
The president has wasted a crisis.
” Just as in the Soviet Union, some comrades are more favored than others. “ or in liberal think stink, Some comrades are more equal than others.
Gosh, Cynthia, which three networks would that be: CNN, MSNBC and CNBC maybe? Perhaps Cartoon Network, Nick@Nite and MTV? How about Showtime, Starz and HBO?
I would love to think you have enough presence of mind to recognize that the likely highest-rated source for the speech would be Fox News, but that would require that you have an inquiring mind deriving information from independent sources you found yourself and blessedly free from prejudice and bigotry.
So I guess we're safe in assuming you meant ABC, CBS and NBC.
They, the left, definitely view themselves as “the ruling class”, the “masters” in a master-slave dichotomy.
The funny thing is, every lefty from the president down to the “more philosophical than thou” hemp stinkinest 5th year junior college student thinks he’s part of “the elite” who are going to be weilding the whip instead of under its lash.
Grandma’s fault!
......Coal, natural gas and hydro are chief sources of energy. .......
But it is oil that runs the trucks upon which the economy is dependent
No oil, Nothing else
15
If the race-baiting Cynthia Tucker has something negative to say about her Messiah, he’s in trouble.
I don't think he has it in him - which is very fortunate, because he's got the rest of the revolutionary vanguard routine down pat.
This is a very dangerous time for Barry - his creators do not believe in elections, they believe in "direct action". When it becomes clear that he can't get it done, he will be replaced.
Exactly. Cities once had extensive electric trolley systems covering huge areas and allowing people to get to work cheaply and cleanly. "Progressives" pushed them to rip up the tracks in favor of bus and car lobbies. Air pollution and massive clean-up efforts on blackened buildings and crackdowns on car manufacturers followed. Parking fees became a slush fund for cities. Now some cities (like the H Street NE ghetto corrider in DC) are ripping up the streets to re-install trolley lines. They're "greener," and cheaper for "the community."
Hell, Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like a genius, and Bill Clinton like a saint.
Is this a precursor to the Apocalypse. ;-)
You forget cars...
And trucks...
And Ships...
Virtually everything that is transported uses oil to do it. And it requires a huge amount of energy to do.
But I should have said “dirty” energy instead of just oil because these people are demanding that we stop using oil, coal and natural gas because they aren’t “clean”.
Not cars...or trucks.
Fact remains, nuclear power plants won't displace any fuel oil to speak of.
That fact does not remain.
If - and yes, it is a huge if - we had plentiful cheap electricity from nuclear power (or any other source) transportation would adapt to use it simply because it would be cheaper. Practical electric cars are not far into the future. Battery technology is improving dramatically as we speak. The real problem in the not so distant future with electric cars is where to get all that inexpensive electricity to replace oil.
You made a statement in favor of nuclear power, in order to save oil.
I noted, correctly, that nuclear power generation wouldn't save any oil -- because it wasn't used in power generation.
Now, you're saying that what you meant was cars and trucks. I'm not a mindreader; I couldn't tell that.
So, I'll stipulate that -- if nuclear power was used to generate power to re-charge car batteries -- yes, it would save oil.
O.K.?
In a weird quirk of fate....France of all places produces something like 79% of their electrical needs via nuclear power. And we are stuck on coal....................
Okay.
I thought I had already corrected myself here:
“But I should have said “dirty” energy instead of just oil because these people are demanding that we stop using oil, coal and natural gas because they aren’t “clean”.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.