Posted on 02/02/2007 11:00:39 AM PST by Right Wing Assault
See video for Hillary's plan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1PfE9K8j0g
Is it possible that the oil industry have squelched new technology in order to maintain demand for fossil fuels? Possibly, and this should be the debate.
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
What is this supposed to mean?
Hairball???
Doesn't surprise me...
Fidel Clinton
Rodham Hussen
Che From Chappaqua
I have just seen Arrogance in human form.
I'd like to see a break down of what the oil companies make per gallon of gas, then compare that to what the governments (Fed, State, and Local) make on that same gallon. I'd be willing to bet each form of government makes more than the oil companies do - per gallon.
Maybe we can solve this whole thing with some Slim Whitman CD's.
I don't think there is anything in the Constitution that allows for 'nationalization' of private property.
Not that the Constitution matters to the left.
This is what She and Bill did prior to the 1992 election.
They promised to take drug companies to the wood shed, then got cash from them in the form of campaign cash.
That's what this is all about. Cornering contributors for cash. Pay me now, or pay me (twice as much) later if I win .....
The United States has been sliding further into socialism ever since Reagan left office. The Democrat Party might just as well change its name to the National Socialist Party, and most Republicans are really fake capitalists. Congress continues to think it knows best by setting a higher minimum wage, seemingly oblivious to the fact that we have the world's strongest economy precisely because it is based on free markets. What will the National Socialists and the so-called Republicans think of next, a federal maximum charge to repair a leaky faucet? How about a maximum doctor fee for the flu? President Bush demonstrated his own ignorance or mental weakness this week by bemoaning the fact that we have "income inequality". Memo to the President: that's how capitalism works. If the Marxist-Leninist day comes when we are all "equal" in outcomes, then we will all be slaves to the state. Capitalism, freedom, and the United States will be dead.
If Hitlery Clinton gould get away with it, she would make Stalin look like a Boy Scout.
What the Clintons have in common with most of the kind of people for whom they stand as Icons is the fact that neither of them has ever had a real job in their entire lives, but has instead found ways to tie themselves to either Government or Institutions, preferably some melange of BOTH, and milk those "cash cows" for all they are worth.
Their only talent resides in this formerly tiny but now
always-expanding corner of reverse "entrepreneurialism", and it is still primarily a Leftist territory, but that too is changing fast.
"this should be the debate"---
------you are absolutely right about that, and there are ANY NUMBER of feasible and meaningful areas of debate when it comes to the whole idea of energy, fossil fuels, alternative sources of energy, energy "independence"> Hillary Clinton is far from alone in her indifference to what should be the REAL debate, though. In characteristic
Marxist fashion, she wants to take this massive industry that ONLY the capitalist Oil interests COUILD have created, and turn it to Marxist ends: it is a ruse to say, as she does, that their profits should be turned to counter-industries
that would eventually put them out of business---a ruse and a laughable contradiction NO ONE believes could happen, even her. No, instead, she is playing (or proposing) a shake-down game on a grand scale; she wants large amounts of oil profits to be skimmed off, bled from, extracted, etc. in order to fund WHATEVER SHE WANTS TO FUND. My God, it could be anything, considering what comprehensive plans she has for America.
No, you will never hear a real debate from her or her minions on this subject, as a real debate is hard enough to come by from ANY Establishment Politician.
It's not the oil industry by itself, it's not the auto industry by itself, but put them together and you have got an unbreakable Yin-Yang and one EXTREMELY powerful monolith of the Status Quo---you've got nothing less than the INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE, and all those forces that coalesce and combine to protect it and its inviolability.
If we were interested in virtually FREE energy we would ALREADY be devising ways to implement engines for cars that did not burn fossil fuel. We have long known how to do this, and advances have already been made. And if we could buy gas for 50 cents a gallon, none of us would even be bothered by the constantly rising and falling prices, and how tied THEY are to forces outside our own control, and most MADDENINGLY, how they are somehow ALSO tied to fostering, funding and furthering the aims of petrodollar-rich Islamists who want to destroy us, by a thousand cuts if not a few very big ones.
People like Hillary, and sorry to say, just about everyone else, are only interested in this issue insofar as it serves their own social agenda,and/or existing power business arrangements. This is so obvious it almost does not bear repeating. It was 9-11 that brought these things into sharper focus than they have ever been before---the gas crisis of the 1970s was just "priming the pump".
Her "program" as she expresses it, almost sounds good, and idealistic, and reasonable, even given the generally Marxist assumptions behind it. But that's not what would happen if she were Commander-in-Chief of this program. The oil industry would pay lip service to a more progressive direction , just as the auto industry has: answering widespread public dissatisfaction with tweaking this and that to help us get 3 more MPG, and , hey, put 5% less pollution in the atmosphere within say, the next 10 or 20 years.
SUGGESTED READING FOR EVERYONE: INTERNAL COMBUSTION by Edwin Black.
"What is this supposed to mean?"
------I am not dhs12345, but maybe my #294 would provide an answer of sorts, because it was a reply to that statement of his, that I think I understood, and agreed with, and apparently you either don't agree with, or have no idea of what he's talking about. I think my answer is somewhere along the lines of what he's talking about.
Summary: as usual, it will require a major disaster in order for things to change.
Guess that is what it takes to motivate the US. A disaster.
Examples: WWII, 9/11, dirty bomb attack on one of or cities, our dependence on fossil fuels (from countries who hate us), etc.
Unfortunately, it means tough times until the course is reset and we are on track again.
But we are very innovative and driven. And we have survived .
At least so far...
You hit it. The only relevant question is "By what right?" Any other questions -- "What effect will this have on our oil industry?" -- "How would this impact our economy" -- would only begin a debate about the effects of this action, and that is not the point. The only point is that government has no right to confiscate the profits of the oil industry no matter how large. We Republicans should be able to articulate the pro-freedom viewpoint without sounding like penny-pinching national accountants or lesser socialists than the Dem's.
The cat is out of the bag. This is only the tip of the iceberg. It won't stop with big oil. Look out Microsoft, you along with any business is on on the line. She will take away all incentive to produce.
"The problem that accompanies all of this woman's proposals is that they involve not incentives but confiscation and redistribution of what she thinks belongs to the government, i.e. profits."
That is because she is the smartest woman in the world and knows what is best for us.
Why would we trust experts in economics, business management, and fiscal policy when we've got Hillary to guide us?
Once she goes on her "listening tour" you will see this is true.
She is such an idiot on so many levels...
What does she think the oild companies will do with those profits if she does not 'take them' - bake it into pies?
Where does she think the federal government gets the authority to TAKE a private businesses money?
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.