AND 
McCain Praises Development of the Chevy Volt
Today Republican Presidential candidate John McCain toured the GM auto plant that makes Chevrolet Cobalts in Lordstown Ohio. He told workers there among other things that he supports government investment in producing future electric cars.
He also is reported to have praised the development of the Chevy Volt.
He told the workers, “we can lead again in the automotive industry and that can lead to thousands of jobs.”
McCain pledged federal support for research efforts, but said he would not favor a government bailout of automakers.
About research funding he said “once we develop that technology with pure research and development, then we’ve got to hand it over to the private enterprise — the automotive companies. I do not think we should be in direct competition.”
About GMs financial troubles he said “It depends on what you mean by a bailout. If you’re talking about it in the classic terms, I’m afraid not.”
95 Responses to “McCain Praises Development of the Chevy Volt”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
- Report: New Buick Regal Will be First to Get GM’s New Hybrid Drivetrain, and Possibly Plug-in
- Chief Powertrain Engineer Pleased With Chevy Volt’s Charge-Sustaining Mode
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
- Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]Jason M. Hendler
- FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]Jason M. Hendler
- Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]Desertstraw
- energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]crubkings
- 30% reduction November 18, 2009The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]filiep
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
June 27th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Well, I was wondering when McCain would get in on this. He should see this as an extension of his energy plan and get behind it with all of his might.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Of course, not to leave Obama out. He should do the same and give GM and the other auto companies his full support in bringing about alternative energy vehicles.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
There are many compelling reasons for support of the GM Volt by government and the public. I encourage all of you to write your congressman and senator to let them know you support vehicles like the Chevy Volt and you want congress to help where they can in developing new alternative energy for our homes, businesses and vehicles. It is in our national sef-interest to be as free from foreign energy sources as we can be. We need a comprehensive energy plan that includes drilling, developing new alternative energy and punishment for lease holders who do not produce verifiable crude and natural gas reserves in leases issued to them. Let’s start kicking some oil company and government butt.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Hey, if you guys don’t catch the fact that we have a new posting, that leaves me clear to just “spout” off as much as I want to. But after a while I will have to start answering myself and you don’t want to see that. I would be afraid of the answers.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
The only government assistance should be loans from the sale of Green Bonds, so that GM gets low interest loans, which are insured by the US government.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Well, let’s see now. Which of the two presidential candidates are going to tell the UAW that now is the time for them to come to the aid of their country in its time of financial peril and not demand new higher wages and benefits that the auto companies, especially GM, can ill afford? My guess is that neither of them are going to approach this subject now or in the future. Our UAW workers are just as patriotic as every one else, right? I think so.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Jason, I agree any “bailout ” of GM, Ford or Chrysler should be in the best interest of the nation and should be by low interest loans or no interest loans. I would even agree to some of the loan being “forgiven” if certain criteria is met in future performance of the company.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Yeah McCain ! …high five !!!!
(sorry that was an extremely insensitive thing to say…I take it back)
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Oh, joy. Another political thread.
[groans]
What a way to start off a week-end.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I would like for the new president to establish an independent commission, without any members of congress on it, to study the methods other countries are employing to enable their industries to successfully compete in national, regional and world-wide international markets. America can ill afford to be out spent in tomorrow’s world when it comes to developing new products and marketing current and new products. If it takes a semi-public/private company to manage industrial “goals” and awarding research dollars, then let’s take a look at it. Just keep congress out of it directly. Once a congressman gets control of a committee or panel, graft will occur like moss on a tree, except at a much faster pace.
But, we have to start somewhere.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
N Riley #6
I don’t think you’ll ever see the UAW do anything but more of the past. Their thinking seems to be, its better to close plants than cooperate with business. They’ve got that criminal lawyer mentality.
Auto workers may be patriotic but they’re often mislead by there union bosses who are more psychotic than patriotic. Look at how they blocked robots in the factories for years when Japan didn’t and Japan got the big jump on US auto makers.
Anyhow they need laws to protect companies from big unions and bad workers. Do you think there’s any chance of that happening if the Democrats are running the show ?
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
#8 Murray
I am afraid McCain left his high five in a North Vietnamese prison hanging from the ceiling for many, many long hours daily for years.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Where is the thread about how senators voted on PHEV tax credits?
I saw it here somewhere at GM-Volt.com
That is where I would go to see more about what they really think.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
#11 Ed M
Like a snow ball’s chance in hell. But, after saying that, I know the workers are very patriotic. I also agree they have a tendency to believe their union “bosses” over their management. I am also certain management gave them many reasons to not trust them. It is a terrible situation where workers are essentially enslaved by the unions by forcing them to join a union in order to work and at the same time taking a chunk of their pay to spend in ways the worker does not agree with. Union bosses live like large company CEOs — rich and mighty. The workers have received higher pay (and higher union dues, as a result) and better benefits while slowly but surely putting their employer out of business and losing their jobs. Bad management, bad Union Bosses and good workers.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Well, I guess AP has the inside track. The Volt will get 40 miles AER, but then has a 7 gallon gas tank to extend its range to 140 miles. Thus, with the ICE running, the Volt will get less than 20 mpg.
This is why I can’t always believe much of what comes from the media.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Well, theres one thing John McCain & I agree on…we’re both against corporate welfare.
If GM needs money they should borrow it from the oil companies, they’re loaded.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
If you read the two links to the AP and The Wall Street Journal, you could almost taste the difference in flavor from the two perspectives of the same auto plant visit by McCain. The AP had disdain for McCain flavoring their story and for GM apparently because they did not even try to get the information about the Volt correct. That is what makes our jobs more difficult each day when we can not even trust the media to give us the straight story without their coloring it.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Obama and McCain this week saw the logical next step towards energy independence. If the majority of commuters can just run on grid power, we may be able to produce enough oil locally for long distance driving. The Chevy Volt needs to make it into their energy policies. The only bailout should be for consumers to get a tax credit when they buy a volt. Other than that, research grants work great for further developing battery technology.
More Volts = less imported oil = less trade imbalance = a stronger USA
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Sweetness!
The Volt, GM’s finances, politics and bailouts! All in one thread!
I don’t think I have to bring my ’special skills’ to this thread, have at it fellas. I won’t agitate the open wound.
(stir the pot)
Why are we even concerned about what this guy says, he’s not even the next president.
(stir the pot)
Besides GM will be long bankrupt by the time this election comes around!
(stir the pot)
What is it, still like 2 years away? You crazy Americans and your crazy political system. I haven’t been able to get any real news off CNN for like a year…I wish terrible things on Wolfe Blitzer.
(stir the pot)
(Just kidding about all that….move along….nothing to see)
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Microbatman, #13.
Here is your link:
http://gm-volt.com/2008/05/26/gm-ceo-misquoted-about-chevy-volt-price-and-timing-want-it-for-less-get-tax-credits-passed/
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
It’s a good sign that both McCain and Obama know about the Volt and want it to succeed.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
I am a union member, and one place I worked was unionized while I worked there. I did not agree with every union practice, but on the whole unionization worked out well — practices that were abusive, such as demanding that people work extra unpaid hours, were ended. On the whole relations between management and labor improved. Pay and benefits increased only slightly, but working conditions were much much better.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Comment………………………..no comment.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Congress has always funded research for werospace, so why not for the auto industry? Every other country subsidizes their auto makers and this would be a ggod way for the US to be more competitive globally. Also, if they give good rebates to buyers of non-oil using cars, that will help to wean the US off of ouil which is only going to continue to get more expensive until the supplies get depleted which won’t be very long at the current rate.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
2002 GM crushes EV1
“Our nation is addicted to oil!” – George W. Bush 2006
2008 Still no electric cars.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
More pennies for research, when we have the technology, we need production facilities. And McSame offers nothing. Where is American leadership? What did he offer to help bring the Volt to market in real numbers in 2010? Nothing. And Obama offers even less leadership.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
#16 Guy Incog
“Well, theres one thing John McCain & I agree on…we’re both against corporate welfare. If GM needs money they should borrow it from the oil companies, they’re loaded.”
*** *** ***
I wouldn’t shed a tear if GM could somehow con an oil co. or two into buying the PHEV/PEV rights to defunct Nickel Cadmium technology for a few billion and use the cash to pay off some debts.
Seriously though, It’s a shame there isn’t some way to divert profits from gasoline to EV development. Well there is, but no politician would support it.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
It’s a shame that the oil lobbyists have more money than lobbyists from the Big 3, otherwise the Volt can be a political platform to ease our dependence on oil…
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Unfortunately the big 3 are aware that the Japanese automakers have more influence in Washington than they do.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Reminder:
Everyone is lauding John McCain for showing up at the plants, telling us how great the Volt project is and how it deserves Govt. assistance.
Where was this John McCain for the vote on passing the tax credits (HR5351)? Obama and Clinton are on the record with YEA while he is the ONLY US Senator who DID NOT vote.
With one exception, EVERY Senator who voted against this was a Republican. Do not delude yourself that the Republican party, the party of Big Oil and Saudi influence, is going to change becuase they have selected a new ‘electable’ face for 2008.
I hear one thing and see another…so “don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining”
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
I’d be surprised if McCain didn’t praise development of the Volt.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
On the plus side, McCain’s energy advisor is very good. Former CIA Director James Woolsey, who has recently been a big advocate of electric cars as a matter of national security and was featured in Who Killed the Electric Car.
The issue is clear. The night time generating capacity of the US electric grid is an untapped strategic national asset. Phasing out dirty coal, oil and gas plants and replacing with nuclear and renewables in combinatio with electrifying the transport infrastructure is a long term strategy that could improve national security, the trade deficit, and tackle global warming in a time of increasing demand and population size.
Unfortunately, our politicians are arguing over the shape of the table and slamming each other trying to get elected in the next cycle rolling up their sleeves, calling for unity on this issue between the parties and solving a serious problem.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
With our corrupt over lobbied congress it’s going to be difficult to get anything done regardless of who is in the White House. This is why I like GM’s approach of just building this car w/o all those time consuming expensive mkt surveys etc Besides, with gas price prospects who needs a market survey to predict the demand for the Volt?
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Ohm excited #31
Excellent point about long term strategy. This is exactly what we need to do! I would add one item. We could use algae to produce millions of gallons of almost carbon neutral biodiesel and jet fuels. Might take 40 or so years to make this happen but it is worth it.
Imagine if the US created all of our own energy and placed a 1 percent use tax on it. I believe a one percent tax on our energy bill could bail out social security and medicare. Imagine energy paying for our entire federal entitlement program. This would free billions of dollars for education, roads, bridges, etc. or pay off the national debt.
Just a thought – maybe too good to be true knowing how politics can ruin every good idea.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
N Riley #14
I agree there can be sociopaths on both sides of the bargaining table and the workers end up paying. I feel that American cars are much better made than they used to be and that Unions and Management are both trying to do a better job for their own survival.
It’s good to see McCain going to a GM plant to support GM and the workers, it may be political but it is refreshing.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
McCain is old.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
>> McCain is old.
And Obama’s ears have an extremely high drag coefficient. What’s your point?
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I know this is a little off the subject, but how about a volt with the option of a natural gas range extender. I know natural gas is not readily available everywhere, but a guy could set up his own refuling station at home for about $4000. That would totally eliminate the arabs and their terrorist buddies.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Just to let everyone know. I having been driving an electric car all day!
It handles like a dream and recharges in about 90 minutes off standard 110V/15amp outlet. It has great accelaration, and corners like a dream.
She’s cherry red, with black pin stripes. Built in roll cage. Knobby tires, since I tend to off-road a lot.
These RC’s rock! : )
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
#37 electricSteve
You can add the CNG to any gas vehicle and make the ICE “dual fuel”, just have to find a place for the tank. E85 puts OPEC 85% of the way out of business. Sounds like a good start.
Once GM sells a few hundred thousand Volts, we’ll probably have lots of options. Free market is kind of cool that way, just sooooooooo dang slow sometimes . . .
WHERE’S MY VOLT???
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Not a lot in that article.
“What do you think about EV’s John?”
“I like them!”
“Gonna bail out GM?”
“No”
Maybe he or Obama can get the bill containing the credits separated from building some bridge to nowhere in Rhode Island.
I want some more Volt technical data.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Does anyone remember Al Gore back in 1999? Anyone?
I do. He wanted gas prices to go to between $5.00 and $6.00 a gallon, just like Europe, He wanted to do this by raising gas taxes. The stated goal was to improve gas mileage by increasing demand for fuel-efficient cars. The entire Democratic party was behind his platform.
Fast forward to today – He got his wish, almost. Fuel prices are just short of where Al Gore and the democratics wanted them in 2000. We know Republicans have no problem with the oil prices. Their tired refrain goes “There’s nothing we can do about oil prices in the short term”.
If Al Gore had won in 2000, our gas prices would be near $10.00 a gallon today – just like Europe. Today’s high gas prices are doing what the Democrats said they wanted – increasing demand for fuel-efficient cars. So why is the Democratic party so angry at the oil companies for high oil prices, when the oil companies did to oil prices exactly what the Democrats wanted to do to them in 2000?
Answer: The Democrats wanted the oil price windfall for the government – which is now going to the oil companies and the energy future traders. They could have used the government windfall to fund every imaginable Government program. That would insure they stayed in office forever. Now they are pretending they are the party for the people, and saying oil prices are too high. HAH! They just wanted the money for more and bigger government.
So the Republicans are for Big Oil, and the Democratics are for Big Government. So who’s for the little guy? (The ones who play by the rules and go to work every day to earn a living)? Not Obama – the only change he wants is what’s in your pocket. Every cent. He LOVES big government. (Check out his web site). And not McCain, he’s just a bad as George “There’s nothing we can do” Bush.
It just funny to watch McCain walk through GM’s Cobalt factory, then say basically “There’s nothing we can do for GM”. Where have I heard that before ? Something with “dubya” in it. Hmmmmm.
You’re on your own, kids. Neither one gives a **** about you. They want what THEY want, nothing more. So pick your poison in November, and hope for the best in 2009. Have a nice day.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Gsned57… it would be nice if we didn’t import any oil and helped the trade imbalance, and maybe even the dollar would recover. Folks should be aware that even if we produced at least or more oil than we consume, that’s not going to in and of itself going to affect the price of oil… it’s priced on the global market. Our reduced demand should help, but unless demand is reduced worldwide, it’s may not be a dramatic change (and let’s hope it doesn’t… $2 gas comes back and we and the rest of the world will just go back to their old ways). Also keep in mind that oil for general transportation and heating is just part of what we use oil/gas for… it’s used for everything from plastics to cosmetics to fertilizers and other petro-chemicals…. and if big oil/gas has their way and GM, Honda, etc keep pushing a “hydrogen highway”, we’ll be importing tons more natural gas in order to produce it. Let’s hope folks realize the hydrogen hoax and that battery EV’s are the ultimate flex fuel vehicles as electricity can be made from dozens of sources of energy.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Grizzly, #32 says, “With our corrupt over lobbied congress it’s going to be difficult to get anything done regardless of who is in the White House.”
Thank you! That is what I have been saying all along. It does not matter what party wins the White House. They still need to deal with a do nothing, corrupt, useless Congress.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
The Grump, I think you may be mistaken about the proposed oil windfall profits tax…. from my understanding of what I’ve heard of CNBC, the proposal called for a windfall profits tax which the oil companies could AVOID by spending the money themselves on alternative and renewable energy, battery development, etc.
I’d assume the oil companies would actually take that action, leaving the government out of using it for new spending, etc (though we also really could use it to retire some of the massive debt we’ve built up w/deficet spending, but getting us off fossil fuels is more important).
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Look. Talk about corporate welfare. Talk about government funded research.
Let’s forget about ideology!
prag·mat·ic [ prag máttik ]
adjective
Definition:
1. concerned with practical results: more concerned with practical results than with theories and principles
2. philosophy relating to philosophical pragmatism: relating to or characteristic of philosophical pragmatism
3. linguistics relating to pragmatics: relating or belonging to pragmatics
4. learning lessons from history: relating to or analyzing the events of history with emphasis on the lessons that can be learned from them
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
OhmExcited regarding Former CIA Director James Woolsey… yea, he’s also got a chapter named after him “Jim Woolsey Get’s Wired”, in Sherry Boschert’s book “Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars That Will Recharge America” (my copy is from 2006 before GM and others got back on the EV band wagon so there is nothing about the Volt).
I recommend it, it even talks about the hydrogen hoax.
So thumbs up to James Woolsey
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
_____________________________________________________
We now have presidential candidates on both sides of the isle AGAIN making promises about how they are going to help resolve America’s foreign energy dependence if you only vote for them…ok…go ahead…pull my finger guys.
What are America’s politicians (the same guys with the same promises) TODAY really doing to promote alternative energy?….ok….here it is guys…would be funny if not so pathetically sad:
Breaking News, New York Times, June 27th, 2008:
U.S. Freezes All Solar Energy Projects on Federal Lands for Two Years….for extensive environmental impact study!
Here is the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us/27solar.html?ei=5087&em=&en=96ea5e98a35597da&ex=1214712000&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1214621450-xu7ZGOHg8Lu6yO1X1QdDYg
I have mentioned several times on this blog that at the end of the day it gets down to each of us making a meaningful contribution to the foreign energy dependence issue; the power of one! We can not count on our politicians, despite what they promise, to get us out of this mess.
You guys at GM…PLEASE push hard on the VOLT project because America is counting on you. I thank each one of you individually that are part of the project. The power of one!
_____________________________________________________
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
#41 The Grump
“Does anyone remember Al Gore back in 1999? Anyone? I do. He wanted gas prices to go to between $5.00 and $6.00 a gallon…”
Please cite a credible reference. Can you quote a public statement that supports your contention?
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Got me curious, actually –
AL GORE: I think that high gasoline prices definitely are a problem — absolutely.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/election2000/candidates/gore_3-14c.html
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
48 ThombDbhomb:
“Earth in the Balance” Gore, Albert. 1992.
Also included in that gem of a book…the Global Marshall Plan:
The Global Marshall Plan is a plan first devised by Former American Vice-President Al Gore in his bestselling book Earth in the Balance which gives specific ideas on how to save the global environment.
Gore states: “The model of the Marshall Plan can be of great help. For example, a Global Marshall Plan must focus on strategic goals and emphasize actions and programs that are likely to remove the bottlenecks presently inhibiting the healthy functioning of the global economy. The new global economy must be an inclusive system that does not leave entire regions behind. The new plan will require the wealthy nations to allocate money for transferring environmentally helpful technologies to the Third World and to help impoverished nations achieve a stable population and a new pattern of sustainable economic progress. To work, however, any such effort will also require wealthy nations to make a transition themselves that will be in some ways more wrenching than that of the Third World.”
Source: Earth in the Balance, page 297-301
Global Marshall Plan: Five strategic goals “In my view, five strategic goals must direct and inform our efforts to save the global environment”:
stabilizing of world population
the rapid development of environmentally appropriate technologies
a comprehensive change in the economic “rules of the road” by which we measure the impact of our decisions on the environment
negotiation & approval of a new generation of international agreements
a cooperative plan for educating the world’s citizens about our global environment.
The idea is based on the post-WWII Marshall Plan that saw the United States send billions of dollars to Europe to rebuild their war shattered economies.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
#47 CDavis
Dead on. I am hoping we can keep all of the oil companies out of transportation in the future (as much as possible.) They shouldn’t get any grants, subsidies or incentives to work on alternative energy. They had their chance and they did squat for people (of the world for that matter).
They can stay with selling oil and that is it. There is plenty for them to do for the next 200 years.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
I’m one of those 1st in the nation primary voters who voted and gave the win for McCain back in his 2000 primary run. Back then he actually was a straight talker. I didn’t agree with 30% of his policies, but I had a strong feeling he wouldn’t pander to voters but then be in the pockets of lobbiests.
Regardless of what McCain says now, if he had won the primary and then the presidency, there would have been a bigger chance 9/11 wouldn’t have happened (he prorably would have taken the intellgence more seriously given his background), and even if it did, he would have kept us focused on the Afgan’s and not had an admin intent on going into Iraq, turning it into a safe haven for real terroriest. He also wouldn’t have loaded his admin with oil men and ladies (Condy Rice), wasted money on hydrogen research, and may have actually been on the way to energy independence. Never mind our nation’s fiscal situation, McCain would have cut spending, and only then cut taxes after the books were in good shape.
However this time around McCain has reinvented himself, badly failing at trying to be both a maverick and pander to the Bush admin style right. He also seems to be making flip flops and political blunders left and right. Too bad too, I agree with him on the ethanol boondoggle, on cutting pork, etc.
This past primary I voted for the only straight talker this time round… Dr. Ron Paul. I also disagree with at least 30% of what he says, but he, like 2000 McCain, said what he felt, not what he thought he needed to say. I also think fiscal conservatives really get me excited being one myself.
I’ve a life long registered Independent, believe there should be more than 2 parties (or no parties so every canidate was an Indepdent thinking, not towing a party platform) so everything is either black or white on issues, but I think I’m going to have to vote for the Democrat, not McCain, even though I cringed to think I’m voting for someone who supports corn based ethanol, and Obama is no saint, but McCain really looks like 4 more years of Bush policy (I’m not saying 100%, but much closer to that than 2000 McCain).
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
CDAVIS, I broke that breaking news this morning in the other thread on EEStor. It’s really sad. I know N Riley disagrees, but I do have to wonder… the current White House Admin (and McCain) want to give the big oil companies millions of acres in new oil leases (even though there is a 5 year back log on drilling rigs, never mind experienced workers, etc) so maybe in 10 years it will bring enough new oil online to reduce gas prices at the pump by maybe 5 or 10 cents a gallon)… the admin who apointed the head of the EPA, who regardless of full support from the rest of the EPA, refuses to give CA (and more than a dozen other States who will follow suite) , and whom they have never denied a waiver before, a waiver to regular green house gas emissions (which would results in more fuel efficient cars)?
… is it really any surprise? The Bureau of Land Management that made this decision is an agency within the United States Department of the Interior, which is a Cabinet position nominated by the President. The position is held by Dirk Kempthorne, a Republican. A former Senator, during his six years in the Senate, Kempthorne scored a “0″ on the League of Conservation Voters’ legislative scorecards every year except 1993. Read more on his environmental record at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirk_Kempthorne#Secretary_of_the_Interior
Hopefully who every is sworn into the Presidency next January will nominate someone with a better record, and maybe reverse this decision.
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
______________________________________________________
#50 Morgan
With all due respect Morgan, you are quoting from a guy (Gore) that on one hand is saying the world is melting but on the other hand has a personal residence that consumes 20X+ more grid electric power compared to the average American home. Gore recently (because of public outcry of how much grid electricity his home consumes) invested in “greening” his home. Result?: Gore’s home now consumes 10+% more grid electrical power than before he greened his home!
Morgan, how is it that a smart guy like you can come to believe that Gore, who can not manage his own home in terms of addressing the energy issue, can somehow have the answers on how the world needs to be managed?
Forget about turning to the politicians for answers. They are promise makers not problem solvers. Stand up and yourself do your individual part to make a difference. That is the answer; the power of one.
_____________________________________________________
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Has anyone noticed that McCain has the head of a baby ?
Obama has already lied to the public in regards to his campaign financing and was caught illegally holding campaign meetings in his senate office. I despise politicians, they are ALL nothing but professional LIARS.
Give the people what they want to hear. blah blah blah
(Quote)
June 27th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
55 Politico
“Obama has already lied to the public in regards to his campaign financing and was caught illegally holding campaign meetings in his senate office.”
What are you talking about? There is no story circulating about “illegal” meetings. I think you must be confused with a previous election. And as far as campaign finance goes, Obama said he was for campaign finance reform…that is true. Then decided that it was in his campaigns best interest to not take money from the Govt. and then be limited during the general election. Would you rather have a president that gave up obvious advantages just so he could say “well gosh and golley, I guess I should just stick with the original plan cuz thats what I said…even though the circumstances are totally different now and that old plan makes no sense”. Sounds like someone in office right now.
This is the first time that Democrats have the financial advantage and it was done through millions of small contributions (typically under $200). Republicans work on a small set of donors with large pocketbooks. Which sounds more American to you? The next time you want to slander someone, show your references (and please, no FOX news or Rush Limbaugh – they have no credibility).
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 12:08 am
I propose a built-in anti-theft device for the Volt. Since there is a ready supply of hundreds of “volts” and some serious “amps” to back it up, why not rig a security mode that arms the vehicle with the key fob. When armed, anyone who attempts to steal the mighty Volt will get a full dose of GM Wattage throughout their thieving body. I would pay extra for a feature like this and enjoy posting a nice youtube video of the first crispy critter caught roasting next to my beloved Volt. Gotcha.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 12:21 am
56 – Jason C
You are WRONG. Mr. Obama signed an actual document (with his own hand) that promised he would accept “public” financing for his general election campaign. Then he reversed this signed promise. That is nothing short of LYING (but not illegal).
During his Dem Primary campaign, several photos have been circulated showing Obama, IN HIS OFFICE, discussing campaign strategy with no less than three(3) of his campaign advisors present. THIS IS ILLEGAL and a VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW !
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 12:57 am
I can’t wait till Obama is President.
Then we can go back to talking about things we CAN do.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 1:20 am
Volt Security
I love your security system Dr. Frankenstein.
ps: when Obama actually says something that I can judge him on, then I’ll decide if he’s worthy. Up until now he hasn’t said much except the word change, heh heh. Maybe he’s planning a divorce ?
We went through 3 months of when will Hiliary drop out ? do we have to go through another 3 months Hiliary for VP ? and will Bill be nice to Barack. The media is driving me nuts. Why don’t they take a night off and talk about EVs for a change.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 5:58 am
It is amazing to me that a man of muslim desent and muslim up bringing, with family ties to terrorist, that pledges to raise taxes on business (you know the place most people go to get jobs), raise the cost of oil companies, deny drilling in our country so china can drill for some of that same oil, wants to take away my right to own a gun, has been attenting an church with anti-white mentality, marries a wife who hates this country, refused to even put his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegence, doesn’t want to secure the boarder so drug dealers, ILLEGAL aliens and terrorist wont be able to simply walk across the border can even win any major parties nomination shows the sad state of the USA.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:01 am
Oh I forgot he is real good frineds with a terrorist that says he wishes he had done more terrorist acts even to this day.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:07 am
#57 Volt Security – At least in DC (and most states I suspect), rigging a lethal car protection device is illegal, and will get you some serious jail time. You don’t want to go there, trust me.
#48 ThombDbhomb – I don’t cite references. If you are that curious, do your own research.
#61 omegaman66 – Interesting. Very interesting. But like i said, what’s the alternative? McCain? I need a another drink – bartender !
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:10 am
Yes, another political thread, with more fiction than facts.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:56 am
54 CDAVIS:
I was citing a reference for ThomDBhomb. Anyone who didn’t know that Al Gore wanted higher gas prices just didn’t bother to look.
I think Al Gore is off his rocker but, on the other hand, high gas prices in the 4-5 range is in OUR best interests for the next 3-4 years. The worst thing that could happen to Volt Development in a cash strapped GM is $2.50 a gallon gas.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 8:04 am
“The worst thing that could happen to Volt Development in a cash strapped GM is $2.50 a gallon gas.”
This statement made far up this thread is so wrong. The volt is a go and 2.50 gas will not affect its development or its success. Lower gas prices would give people a freaking pay raise that is currently going over seas. This would be a huge boost to the economy and give people more discretionary income.
The biggest and really the only threat to the Volt is GM going belly up. High gas prices are killing GM right now. Killing GM right now is not good for the Volt.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 10:59 am
#63 The Grump
“I don’t cite references.”
Truthiness lives!
#65 Morgan
Your quote didn’t say that Gore wanted gas prices to go to between $5.00 and $6.00 a gallon. In fact, #49 ross actually found a quote saying, “I think that high gasoline prices definitely are a problem — absolutely.”
There is a lot of passionate/crazy talk out there (see #61 omegaman for example). How do we get to peace when so many people are so blinded by ideology and faith that reason takes a back seat?
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Refute one of my “crazy” points and I will show you the proof.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
#64 Joe:
My sentiments exactly. Statik said it best, “Political comments suck.”
I follow this blog pretty closely, but I am not reading this stuff. Next case.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
#68 omegaman66
“…marries a wife who hates this country…”
By your reasoning, McCain also hates this country (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hVeWZjB8zM)
Both Michele Obama and John McCain said things that people read way too much into and then made an issue out of a non-issue. You get crazy when you twist facts to an unreasonable level. The rest of your spin similarly demonizes people. Demonizing people doesn’t lend itself to sanity.
You lament the sad state of the USA. I do too, for different reasons.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I am not reading anything into the facts and statements. I agree one liners, misrepresentation of the facts, taking quote out of context is a huge part of what is wrong with the media in general.
But when you add up the statements and association it can only point to one thing. Once might be a coincedence but when something happens over and over it establishes a pattern.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
OK, so the USA is doomed. Everyone in power, or seeking power is corrupt. Doomed, I tell you, Doomed.
Now for an opinion. The USA is and will continue to be, the best country in the world.. It never has, and never will, do anything to MAKE people stay here. And yet our population grows (legally and illegally). Maybe that’s the problem: every person living here must either be so modestly intlelected or so uncaring, that we’re sure to be circling the porcelin facility.
We’re just spoiled because we’ve had it so well in this country for so long. Hasn’t anyone commenting here talked to their grandparents about the (actual) Great Depression? I realize that reading about it would be far too great an effort. After all, it’s a weekend.
Sigh. Rant and computer off. I’m disgusted.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
#24
werospace.
Very Black program! Black! Black! You are not supposed to even think about it never mind mention it! Boy are you it trouble now! See the black suburbans parked on your street? don’t go near them or you’ll be gone. Just a friendly warning.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
I apoligise for post # 73 I was just bored awaiting my Volt. Once I get my Volt I’ll be out driving around again and not bothering you all any more. What happens to this site once I get my Volt?
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
58 Politico
“During his Dem Primary campaign, several photos have been circulated showing Obama, IN HIS OFFICE, discussing campaign strategy with no less than three(3) of his campaign advisors present. THIS IS ILLEGAL and a VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW !”
Really…Hmmmm. First of all, show me a link to the dated photos, if they even exist. Second, if they DID exist, were there cartoon bubbles on the people in his office showing that they were talking about campaign strategy and not, say….bowling? Your argument has no basis in fact. You should go and work for FOX News, they love baseless Propaganda and half truths.
And if you want to talk about changing his mind on campaign finance (I was going to use ‘hypocrite’ instead of ‘changing his mind…’ as Sen. McCain helped AUTHOR campaign finance reform but I decided against it), Sen. John McCain opted out of Federal financing during the Primaries so he could spend an unlimited amount of money but did not clear it with the FEC first (as per the law). This legal matter is still pending a quorum but 4 of the 6 seats are vacant as the Senate will not ratify the Presidents nominations. Republican candidates don’t need the cash, the Republican Party coffers are overflowing with lobbyist cash.(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25259863/)
I follow up my statements with facts, not wild accusations without basis. Now, can we please get back to talking about the Volt and it’s development?
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
61 omegaman66
68 omegaman66
71 omegaman66
“I am not reading anything into the facts and statements. I agree one liners, misrepresentation of the facts, taking quote out of context is a huge part of what is wrong with the media in general.”
Every statement you made in your post (#61) is exactly what you rail against in this one cited above (#71). Since you are keen to make mountains out of molehills and spout the lies of others, you should check the facts first:
1) “[Sen. Obama is] a man of muslim desent and muslim up bringing”
What is your point on this? You forgot to say his middle name is Hussein. This is nothing more than fear mongering. You might as well say “This man is different from you…he is not like us”. Since you cite it below (’his church is anti white’…ummmm, muslims don’t go to church, they go to a mosque), it is noteworthy to remind everyone that he is, actually, a Christian.
2) “[Sen Obama has] family ties to terrorist”
I suppose you mean Mr. Ayers? Calling it ‘family’ is quite a stretch. A man, never charged with a crime for something that happened in the ’60s is a supporter of Sen Obama. That is all you had to say. McCain’s former jailer (a man who tortured American soldiers and airmen) says he would vote for McCain… quite the endorsement.
3) “[Sen Obama] pledges to raise taxes on business (you know the place most people go to get jobs).”
Sen Obama has never said this. What has been said is that he wants to allow current tax cuts to expire and to increase those on individuals who make more than $250,000/year.
Without tax money, there is corruption and ineffective government, without government there is no security. Without security there is anarchy, and THAT is not good for business.
4) “[Sen Obama pledges to] raise the cost of oil companies”
This is true! It is called a “Windfall tax” and since companies like Exxon are bringing in more profits than ANY private company in the history of mankind ($40.61 BILLION last year alone…no, that is not an exaggeration), Sen Obama wants them to pay a larger percentage (above $80/barrel). The money gained by the Govt would be used for “a $1,000 tax cut for working families, an expansion of the earned- income tax credit and assistance for people who can’t afford their energy bills.”
5) “[Sen Obama pledges to] deny drilling in our country so china can drill for some of that same oil”
This has been proven to be a false statement:
“Washington (AP) – Vice President Dick Cheney’s office acknowledged on Thursday that he was mistaken when he asserted that China, at Cuba’s behest, is drilling for oil in waters 60 miles from the Florida coast.”
There ARE , however, undeveloped oil leases that oil companies currently have in place that they are NOT drilling in. What is going on here is a land grab by oil companies while they still have a friendly President in office with an atmosphere of fear among the populace that will allow the companies to do what they want. Allow drilling today and it is 10 – 15 years before you see a drop of oil.
6) [Sen Obama] wants to take away my right to own a gun
Unless you are a criminal…this is not true.
7) [Sen Obama] has been attenting an church with anti-white mentality
Muslims go to church? Oh, thats right, I already talked about this.
Obama = Christian
Reverand White is many things, but I am not familiar with the “anti-white” one. He DID say “God damn America!” and seems to love to hear himself speak.
Sen. Obama has left that church and distanced himself from the “bombastic” Reverand. On the other side of the coin, Sen McCain has his own problems with his own Rev Hagee who called Catholicism a “Godless theology of hate”. The Rev Hagee later apologized for letting people know what he was thinking.
Here is her actual quote:
“Let me tell you something. For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country, because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”
Decide for yourself what she means, it sounds to me like she is talking about hope and how it is making a comeback. What is clear is that she does not say anywhere and at any time that she “hates” America….period.
9) “[Sen Obama] refused to even put his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegence” (by the way, you misspelled this…it should be ‘allegiance’)
There IS a photo and video of this happening at least once. There are also plenty of videos and photos of him saluting the flag of the USA, leading the Senate in the pledge of allegiance and even wearing a flag lapel pin.
10) [Sen Obama] doesn’t want to secure the boarder so drug dealers, ILLEGAL aliens and terrorist wont be able to simply walk across the border
Did you know that Sen McCain introduced a bill (it never became law due to Republican aversion to perceived ‘amnesty’ portions) called the “Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act?” While never enacted into law, here is what it had to say on immigration: “the nation’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants would be able to apply for citizenship after six more years of residency if they hold stable jobs, pay back taxes and fines, maintain clean criminal records, and learn English.”
There were 9 cosponsors in the Senate, and one was Sen Obama.
there is more at his website:
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
You can compare positions at John McCain’s website:
http://www.johnmccain.com/
You said “It is amazing to me that a man of muslim desent and muslim up bringing… can even win any major parties nomination shows the sad state of the USA”. What is sad is that you may actually believe what you wrote and are more than willing to pass this garbage on to others.
Dude, I can do this all day, keep that half truth stuff coming! While your at it, question my patriotism…I dare you…I double dog dare you.
Volt rules!
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
#71 omegaman66
“But when you add up the statements and association it can only point to one thing.”
I’ll bite – what is that one thing?
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
# 61 omegaman66
Your drivel wins you the prize for spewing so many lies in so short a space. Everyone, even the Fox News anchors, can only stand back in awe.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Yes, vote for Obama so when can have change. Change what? Still trying to figure that out. Maybe he wants a $ex change!
By the way I don’t care for McCain either.
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
# 15 BillR
I think the range is 640 not 140. If the tank holds seven gallons then that would be a whole lot closer to 100 mpg than to 20.
Obviously the range would be less if you used a lower power flex fuel like corn ethanol. Then again how cool would it be to be able to use it?
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Lyle,
Do we really NEED a political forum?
Be well,
Tag
PS PDNFTT
(Quote)
June 28th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
>>
>>>> McCain is old.
>> And Obama’s ears have an extremely high drag coefficient. What’s your point?
>>
No point. Just stating the obvious. There wasn’t much else left to comment on with this article except the picture of McOld. As TBK said,
>>
>> Not a lot in that article.
>>
>> “What do you think about EV’s John?”
>>
>> “I like them!”
>>
>> “Gonna bail out GM?”
>>
>> “No”
>>
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 5:51 am
Obama on gun control:
FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.1
FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.2
FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3
FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2
FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago , Washington , D.C., and other cities.4
FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5
FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6
FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.
FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7
FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and “research.”8
FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.9
FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.10
FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11
FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2
FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14
FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month sales restrictions.9
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.9
1. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 219, July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00219)
2. Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, Sept. 9, 1996. The responses on this survey were described in “Obama had greater role on liberal survey,” Politico, March 31, 20087. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html)
3. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 217, Kennedy amendment July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00217)
4. David Wright, Ursula Fahy and Sunlen Miller, “Obama: ‘Common Sense Regulation’ On Gun Owners’ Rights,” ABC News’ “Political Radar” Blog, http://blogs.abcnews.com, 2/15/08. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-common-se.html)
5. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2004 SB 2165, vote 20.
6. “Fact Check: No News In Obama’s Consistent Record.” Obama ’08, December 11, 2007. (http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/11/fact_check_no_news_in_obamas_c.php)
7. “Candidates’ gun control positions may figure in Pa. vote,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Wednesday, April 2, 2008, and “Keyes, Obama Are Far Apart On Guns,” Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04. (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_560181.html)
8. 1998 Joyce Foundation Annual Report, p. 7. (http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/98_AnnualReport.pdf)
9. “Obama and Gun Control,” The Volokh Conspiracy, taken from the Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999. (http://www.volokh.com/posts/1203389334.shtml)
10. Illinois Senate, May 5, 2002, SB 1936 Con., vote 26.
11. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2003, SB 2163, vote 18.
12. “Clinton, Edwards, Obama on gun control,” Radio Iowa, Sunday, April 22, 2007. (http://learfield.typepad.com/radioiowa/2007/04/clinton_edwards.html)
13. Chicago Tribune blogs, “Barack Obama: NIU Shootings call for action,” February 15, 2008, (http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/barack_obama_comments_on_shoot.html)
14. Barack Obama campaign website: “As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment . . .” (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/urbanpolicy/#crime-and-law-enforcement.)
Uhhhh…. can you show me a gun control law that Obama has voted against?
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 5:55 am
Jason C wrote:
2) “[Sen Obama has] family ties to terrorist”
I suppose you mean Mr. Ayers? Calling it ‘family’ is quite a stretch. A man, never charged with a crime for something that happened in the ’60s is a supporter of Sen Obama. That is all you had to say. McCain’s former jailer (a man who tortured American soldiers and airmen) says he would vote for McCain… quite the endorsement.
So you think a man fighting in his own country for his own army that was fighting against the United States would now vote for McCain is somehow similiar to having a friend who is someone who has admitted commiting terrorist acts against the United States within the united states and to this day says he wishes he had done more!
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:00 am
Jason C. wrote
1) “[Sen. Obama is] a man of muslim desent and muslim up bringing”
What is your point on this? You forgot to say his middle name is Hussein. This is nothing more than fear mongering. You might as well say “This man is different from you…he is not like us”. Since you cite it below (’his church is anti white’…ummmm, muslims don’t go to church, they go to a mosque), it is noteworthy to remind everyone that he is, actually, a Christian.
I agree he is now a practicing christian. I never once said he wasn’t. His name “Hussein means nothing to me that is why I didn’t mention it. So I guess you are agreeing with me on this one.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:17 am
Jason C. wrote:
“3) Sen Obama has never said this. What has been said is that he wants to allow current tax cuts to expire and to increase those on individuals who make more than $250,000/year.”
You just said he never said he was going to raise taxes but then went on to say he would allow the tax cuts to expire and would increase taxes on those that make over 250K. It might not be on you are me but that is a tax increase.
He has said this and more. http://www.oxfordprinceton.com/dib/dib.asp?article=18637092&title=Obama+pledges+oil+windfall+tax&key=The+Oil+Industry
“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has announced that will introduce a windfall tax on oil companies if he is elected in November.”
Ummm… ExxonMobil has only made 8-12% profit margin on the different parts of their business units. This is inline or below what most businesses make. Tax them and guess who will end up paying for the tax increase. Everyone at the pump. Basically a pledge to raise gas prices.
Oboma has said he wants too double the Capital Gains Tax Rate.
http://www.gop.com/NEWS/NewsRead.aspx?GUID=1c8467ed-a36c-45c8-919a-a02d0cedc3ec
“The reality is that the Clinton and Obama rate increases would hit millions of Americans who make well under $200,000. In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% came from households with incomes below $100,000.”
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:22 am
5) “[Sen Obama pledges to] deny drilling in our country so china can drill for some of that same oil”
This has been proven to be a false statement:
“Washington (AP) – Vice President Dick Cheney’s office acknowledged on Thursday that he was mistaken when he asserted that China, at Cuba’s behest, is drilling for oil in waters 60 miles from the Florida coast.”
There ARE , however, undeveloped oil leases that oil companies currently have in place that they are NOT drilling in. What is going on here is a land grab by oil companies while they still have a friendly President in office with an atmosphere of fear among the populace that will allow the companies to do what they want. Allow drilling today and it is 10 – 15 years before you see a drop of oil.
My rebutal. This is indeed true. China has leases now of the Cuban coastline and have you ever heard of directional drilling.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/china_starts_oil_drilling.html
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:27 am
#10 on securing the boarder.
In your own rebuttal you wrote: “the nation’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants would be able to apply for citizenship after six more years of residency if they hold stable jobs, pay back taxes and fines, maintain clean criminal records, and learn English.”
Ummm…. and just what do you think would happen on our borders if you promising a route to citizenship for illegal aliens without secure borders? And why should an illegal alien have more rights than a Mexican or any other Nationality for that matter that is trying unsuccessfully to enter this country legally?
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:36 am
“Dude, I can do this all day, keep that half truth stuff coming! While your at it, question my patriotism…I dare you…I double dog dare you.”
I am not questioning your patriotism. Never did. You may be able to do this all day long. I quit. Just do a google search on any of the subjects/points I didn’t get too and read to your hearts content. Decide for you self.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 6:38 am
my first post on gun control issue was the longest. It must be in moderation.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 7:49 am
I admit I was wrong on one of the points. Obama was not raised muslim after he was two years old. I had thought it was older than two.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 11:40 am
I posted this as part of my first post. Obama voting record is clear on the second amendment.
I will just post an portion of the original post without the supporting links for each one. This is all voting record stuff so no conjecture here.
Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.
Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.2
Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3
Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2
Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago , Washington , D.C., and other cities.4
Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5
Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6
Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.
Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7
Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and “research.”8
Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.9
Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.10
Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11
Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12
Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13
Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2
Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14
Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month sales restrictions.9
Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9
Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9
Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21. 9
The number after each point goes to the numbered link which I have omitted this time to hopefully prevent a long moderation wait.
(Quote)
June 29th, 2008 at 11:52 am
#84 – #91 omegaman66
1. “[Mr. Ayers] and Mr. Obama served together on the nine-member board of the Woods Fund, a Chicago nonprofit, for three years beginning in 1999, and they have also appeared jointly on two academic panels, one in 1997 and another in 2001. Mr. Ayers, who was never convicted in the Weather Underground bombings, is now a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago”
Here is a quote from Sen Obama, regarding this issue:
“This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn’t make much sense, George.
The fact is, is that I’m also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.”
2. You already have stated in 91 that you were wrong about this…thats cool. My point was why bring it up at all?
3. It costs oil companies less than $10 per barrel to extract and ship a barrel of oil. The “finding” costs to explore and develop an oil field range from $5 per barrel in the Middle East to $67 per barrel off of the U.S. coast. These are production costs. So when the market price jumps due to speculators, political unrest, supply disruption, or other similar events, it is a windfall for the oil company. Yes…Oil companies have it rough. They also have massive tax loopholes. They may SAY that a tax like this will raise prices, but it is just a reason to keep the extra money they are making.
4. Answered above
5. “Not so fast, says Jorge Pinon, an energy fellow with the Center for Hemispheric Policy at the University of Miami. First, China doesn’t hold any offshore oil concessions in Cuba. And though the island nation has partnered with a number of nations proficient in deep water drilling, there’s not been any action since June 2004 because the deep water drilling equipment is needed elsewhere, Pinon says. And some of the companies have expressed reservations about how to turn the potential crude into product: Cuba doesn’t have the refinery capacity and the Cuban embargo prohibits it from coming to the U.S.”
What we need to focus on is doing more with what we have and expanding where we get our energy from (wind, solar, tidal, etc on a house to house basis). I think that the Volt will be very helpful in this regard but it is just the first move. As I said, 5 – 10 years before you see a drop of oil and then you have all the problems attached to oil (environmental spills, air pollution, staying hooked on oil). It only takes two years to make a solar plant.
6. You agreed that gun control should be in moderation. Guns in the hands of law abiding sportsman and hunters = good. Guns in the hands of criminals=bad. Now, how we make that happen is the rub.
7. You agreed with me on this one
8. You didn’t try to rebut this one
9. You didn’t try to rebut this one
10. This country is made of immigrants and I agree that we need to have a sound and controlled border. If you went to the web site I listed you would have seen that Sen. Obama has a multi pronged plan to address this (I have it here in bullet form but you can see the whole plan at http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/):
• Create Secure Borders
• Improve Our Immigration System
• Remove Incentives to Enter Illegally
• Bring People Out of the Shadows
• Work with Mexico
Personally, I think that the two most important are working with Mexico and removing incentives to enter illegally. You still have to deal with all the immigrants who are here. You talk of secure borders in the physical sense, I am talking about a mental barrier in addition. Working with Mexico means helping them make life better in Mexico and reducing the incentive for them to make a dangerous journey across the border where they could die trying. (i.e. jobs, quality of life, etc.).
(Quote)
July 18th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Why has this positive development, i.e. a presidential candidate saying that EV’s would be good for this country, become a political debate???
Last time I checked there weren’t separate prices at the pump for Republicans and Democrats and Independents? I don’t think anyone on this list is happy with hundreds of billions of dollars going to countries who hate us and kill Americans!
Clearly, both political parties have failed us with respect to Energy Independence, and we are now seeing the result of that. Four-twenty at the pump is just the tip of the iceberg; food prices have skyrocketed, as has everything else.
If Dems want to blame Republicans, go ahead. If Reps want to blame Democrats, go ahead. In the end, it will not solve a single problem, except piss each other off and get nothing done (see your current Congress).
Our problem is an American problem caused by Democratic and Republican administrations that did little if anything to prevent our current crisis. Congressmen, I recently heard, pay 60 cents a gallon for gas; so they are not effected the way we are, particularly when many of them are wealthy and have, in the past, voted pay raises for themselves while in session. No one on this list has the power and privilege.
So, please relax. Let’s just be happy that for the first time, leaders from both parties are at least acknowledging the problem.
David
(Quote)