Posted on 12/11/2015 11:57:00 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Donald Trump attacked Ted Cruz for not supporting ethanol subsidies. He said in Iowa on Friday, "Oil companies give him a lot of money, so he's for oil."
The thing about oil and gas is, it doesn't require big subsidies, because it's the cheapest and most efficient form of fuel for cars. Ethanol, on the other hand, does require big government subsidies, because it is highly uneconomical. Ethanol is much more expensive than oil and gas and, gallon for gallon, produces much less energy than gasoline. That's why the government has to hand over billions in subsidies to big agri-businesses to keep it going. And that's also why the government has to force oil companies to blend ethanol in with their fuels. Because without government coercion, oil companies wouldn't do it, and the price of gasoline would be substantially lower than it is now.
Additionally, ethanol actually acts as a corrosive on car engines. It slowly degrades car parts over time.
But the worst thing about ethanol is that not only does it require taxpayer subsidies, and not only does it raise the price of blended gas, but it also raises the price of many different kinds of foods. Ethanol is made with corn - a lot of it. And when a lot of corn production is diverted to ethanol, there is less corn available to use for food. Corn is heavily used as a sweetener in many food products. By raising the price of corn, the price of many different kinds of foods are raised.
That is what subsidizing ethanol gives us. That is what Donald Trump is for and Ted Cruz is against. Ted Cruz is starting to lead in some Iowa polls, and he's doing it without this kind of pandering...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"............. In most circumstances, the killing of a police officer is a state offense and each state sets the penalty for it. Some have decided that the penalty should be death. Others have decided that it should not be. Some states do not have the death penalty at all. No president can change that. Nor can a president override the judgement of the judge or jury responsible for sentencing.
This is all basic civics. People running for president should understand such things.
Panderers are everywhere in politics, and the more outrageous they sound, the more obvious it is that they are lying and that they will say anything to win election.
Many outsiders run for office, but the successful ones tend to study the job they plan to do. Trump comes from a world of business, and in that world, he makes decisions and people dutifully carry them out. If he says, "You're fired," then you have to clear your desk.
But that is not so in the world of American government. The founding fathers designed the system to frustrate ambitious, power-hungry executives who want to make big changes and accomplish things.
That includes Barack Obama, who in his arrogance and amid his own bout of re-election pandering once asserted that his agenda could not wait for Congress to act. It also includes Trump, whose campaign might well demonstrate just how far a politician can get if he does nothing else besides pander."
Trump spoke tonight in Des Moines, IA
I watched the entire speech.
He said Cruz was against ethanol and he, Trump, was not.
He was taking questions from the audience and when asked about it he said he guessed it was because Cruz was from an oil state, texas, and was somewhat beholding to big oil because they donate to his campaign.
In another question he was asked if there were a place for Cruz either on his ticket or with the SC as a justice.
Trump replied that he liked Cruz a lot and that if he, Trump, were elected there would definitely be a high place for Cruz. He made a few more complimentary comments also.
My point: If you didn’t watch the entire speech and the Q&A then you’re simply responding to an article designed to pit Trump against Cruz and that IS NOT what went down.
Trump-bashing now?
:D
Everyone needs to tone down the rhetoric just a bit.
"Donald Trump attacked Ted Cruz for not supporting ethanol subsidies. He said in Iowa on Friday, "Oil companies give him a lot of money, so he's for oil."
Blah, blah, blah.
What do you think about things Trump says that are clearly pandering?
How do you square that, knowing he says he’ll do things that he doesn’t have the power to do?
And how is pointing that out “bashing?”
Cruz is not running for VP..
There is no excuse for supporting Ethanol, other than pandering to Iowa and the farm belt.
It is what it is...
You are bashing Donald Trump.
You regularly bash Donald Trump.
All the time. It seems like all you do, actually. Since your guy dropped out of the race, that is.
The media has been ordered to manufacture a fight between Trump and Cruz
Another of many squalls they’ll have to weather
Jump in the water’s fine
We’ve got grown ups on board
It’s a primary...
There is a contest here. It will be this way until the votes are counted.
cage match on. Cruz isn’t going to let trump distort his record. Cheap shot on the religion/Cuba thing too. Can’t wait to see Ted swimming the moat with the knife in his teeth, knowing how to fight
Without always being self aggrandizing and belittling/trashing anyone who does not kiss his butt.
I post articles that question and point out his positions (past, present and future).
Why is that such a problem?
Vetting used to be the standard and by-word at FR.
I listened to that section of Trump’s speech a couple of times - and NOWHERE does he make commentary - one way or the other - about “subsidies.” He only stated that he supports ethanol and other forms of renewable energy.
That could be read as with or without the present subsidies. Being that ethanol has received such since 1979, and that it is now a mature business, I would argue that those subsidies will likely come to an end - particularly for reason of the higher costs they impose on the middle class.
However, the only way to know for certain is to ask Trump the direct question of whether he supports those subsidies - otherwise all of this effort by the anti-Trump crowd is nothing but speculation.
Trump is the “Now Game”
Cruz is the “Long Game”
Hillary is the “Inevitable Game”
Sanders is the “Gibbs me dat Game”
Yeb! is the “Bail me out Cronies Game”
It seems to me you only criticize Trump.
That is not in my mind, a positive contribution.
How about you post positive things about your current candidate, rather than trying to be critical of Trump.
Ethanol represents thousands of jobs to Iowans.
That will definitely affect most Iowan voters and the choice they make.
Jobs are a priority with Iowans, and all across the Country..
I'm not an ethanol advocate but I'd prefer to continue to have it rather than have more Americans out of work.
Talk to the coal miners up in Kentucky and what Obama has done to them.
Cruz is liable to go backward in his polling numbers with iowa voters if he persists.
I know you and any Cruz supporter doesn't want to hear that but that's the reality.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/in-iowa-donald-trump-hits-ted-cruz-on-ethanol-and-religion/
Dec 11, 2015
DES MOINES — On the state fairgrounds at a campaign event, Donald Trump wasted little time before he went after Ted Cruz’s stance on ethanol.
“He’s for the oil but I understand it oil pays him a lot of money, he’s got to be for oil right,” Trump said. And later in the night Trump expanded on the comment.
“Well look he’s from Texas — to the best of my knowledge, there’s a lot of oil in Texas, right? So, he gets a lot of money from the oil companies, and he’s against ethanol and everything you’re else talking about. And I’m not I’m totally in favor. And you know it’s a big industry here, it’s a big industry. You know if that industry is upset Iowa’s got problems,” Trump said to the crowd of about 1,500, composed of Iowans from special interest groups.
Trump also claimed he is evangelical and Christian, and while talking about Cruz and his religion, also brought up his ethnicity.
“Not a lot of evangelicals come out of Cuba in all fairness it’s true. Not a lot come out, but I like him nevertheless,” Trump said.
Cruz’s father is Cuban, but he was born in Canada........
I am not seeing any intentional media hyperbolic statements here...
At least not yet. What I have seen is standard reportage as it applies to Trump and Cruz as competitor’s for the same job.
Both receive a lot of hyperbolic crap from the media. But to say they are engineering this, I think is premature...at least until they do..
Frankly I have expected it for some time now...
I think it’s likely going to get a little dicey around here, and I will try to refrain from getting riled up as I defend my guy..
But it’s just common sense that I will have to defend against Trump who will have to go on offense as we enter Iowa and down the line...
I’m just watching. Whichever guy, who wants to and can defend the U.S comes out ahead, fine
But if you say you’re defending Cruz against Trump, you’re with the media
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.