How dare Obama force the automakers to evolve and keep up with other industries. How dare he do something about the air we’re breathing. How dare he lessen the amount of oil we need to buy on the international market. How dare he keep money in people’s pocketbooks by making less trips to the gas station.

Come to think of it, how dare he take away any future opportunity of war over oil.

Sidebar: Looks like Bush bankrupted ANOTHER venture. His ethanol plants are filing Chapter 11 all over the country…….

Let’s see: That’s three oil drilling businesses, Ethanol businesses, and America he’s bankrupted in his lifetime. Texas Rangers, notwithstanding…..

While this may not be as large of a mandate as many of us would’ve liked, it, nevertheless, huge. This is a huge policy upgrade, one that should’ve been done long, long ago.

Nice job Obama. Now, we’ll see how the automakers, and republicans, react. Anything that uses less oil is not high on their priority list.

I don’t think it will be that dramatic on the small vehicles. The Ford Fusion hybrid already meets the requirement at 41 city 35 highway. The Focus sedan is rated at 35 mph (the European diseal version gets 42mpg with tweaks pushing it over 50mpg). The Prius gets 55 mpg. VW is coming out with a hybrid Gulf at 69 mpg. There is a rumor that Ford is coming out with the 2011 Escort hybrid with 100 mpg. The Ford F-150 hybrid conversion ($60,000 plus the cost of the vehicle) is rated at 41mpg.

The big problem would be in the tractor trucks that get at best 7 mpg. There would probably have to be an exemption for buses, tractor trucks, motor homes and other large vehicles because there is no known technology to vastly improve their mpg and there will probably never be.

Let’s Not Stop There..
Let’s also mandate that China and India not open up 200 coal-fired power plants or as the folks at R/S say Making 177 million cars on those nation’s roads, along with all the other cars that are about to hit the road..
What about Used Cars and Trucks??
What are we going to mandate with them??

Anyone Remember That Good Ole Luxury Tax?
You know the one that the Very Rich People were suppose to pay??
It Sure Made the Used Yacht sales go up..
Just like this is going to make the Used Big Vehicle sales go up..

FOLKS,, In case you missed it..
Some Americans Want to Drive a Big Car, Truck or SUV..
How are some of our Welfare Families going to get they CHIRENS to Disney Land without a big SUV for their over weight Obese Asses,, All 8 of them..
What about those cars and trucks bringing all those Undocumented Workers in from Mexico??

What Are We Going To Mandate There??

cont:
I like big cars and truck and fast boats..
But I guess it doesn’t matter what over 65% of Americans want,
Just as long as a very small minority can make mandate for the rest of us, just to make themselves feel better..
Al Gore planning on downsizing his cars, trucks, boats and planes??

We,ll see how the auto makers react? The Obama Adm is the auto makers. They bought and own GM and Chrysler.
I’m all for better mileage but has anyone thought of the possible unintended consequences?
The only way for this plan to affect US oil consumption is if people actually buy these new green cars. But if the Govt micromanages the car companies and force them to make these little tin can death traps that nobody wants to buy then the auto companies, now on life support, will just die. People will hang on to their larger gas eating cars longer. This will cause more oil consumption not mention the economic disaster.
And to anticipate your rebuttal, yes they can make larger Hybrids and I’m all for it. But how bout the Prius? Yeah they get great mileage but did you know their batteries, which don’t have a long life, are becoming a huge problem in land fills especially in CA. Now this is a real environmental emergency not all the BS about global warming.
It won’t be the first time that radical environmentalist and their lib allies in Govt make a worse mess out of things they say they’re trying to fix.
Just a few things to think about.

I think the fuel standards are a step in the right direction, but we also have to remember more immediate problems. The US should not only be the leader in the global environmental movement but also the leader in fight to make severe poverty history. The Borgen Project has good info on the estimated cost of ending global poverty:

$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.

$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget.

Good riddens to ethanol. All it did was raise the price of corn tacos.
And why blame Bush? He was just trying to please the environmentalist loby.
Stupid move on his part. Nothing will ever please them short of all of us living in caves.

Whoopdeedoo.

Someone please name me 2 industries that were made better economically (Low tar cigs are health benefit, not economic to firm) by government mandates on what they produce?

First of all the Obama administration isn’t “The Obama administration is upping national fuel economy to 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016.”

It is mandating that goal, which isn’t the same as achieving that goal. For the goal to be reached consumers actually have to want to buy fuel efficient cars. If they don’t, then Obama is helping to sink the auto industry that his other hand is busy trying to save.

Second, all the Obama administration did was move the existing goal of 35 mpg by 2020 up by four years, and make it 35.5 mpg. Again, whoop-de-do.

Why is a rock ‘n’ roll magazine’s politics section such a bootlicker of the political establishment. Where’s Taibbi when you need him?

More importantly, unless you’re saying it with a British accent, say “a historic,” not “an historic.”

David, again you’re at it with this Borgen Project, so I’ll ask again, who is going to cultivate the food, dispense the food, ensure the food reaches the people in need, etc, etc. The logistics necessary for such a project run much deeper and become much more intricate than merely throwing numbers up there. Also, keep in mind, our defense budget is not only for our defense, but that of our allies as well.

Jed Clampett

Looks like the leadership of GM is taking the money they extorted us into giving them and are now ready to use it to move all their operations to China.
I say, indict the entire leadership structure of the company for deceitful practices, extortion, fraud, theft from the treasury, corrupting politicians, etc. Take the hundreds of millions of dollars they have made for themselves on the backs of the working class then send them to live destitute in Haiti.

On a better note. Kudos to Chrysler for investing in Tesla motors, now there’s a company that may just show it has Americans interests in mind and understand they can be successful with our support.
In the meantime, we can convert our current ICEs to run on gasoline vapors rather than liquids to improve efficiency. Hydrogen boost technologies should also be adopted. No more letting the greedy take us for a ride, no more con games from elite, heartless politicians.

Take your country back and save the world!!

Jed Clampett

Yes David, how can you support such an impossible cause that no one can fix. If there was a way to make food available to all, ‘God’ would have given it to us long ago.
You should follow the Republican ideology to just reduce the population with wars, disease and destitution.

Jed

I suppose we should just raise taxes and increase regulation and hope that that induces actual solutions to solve problems. Give me a break.

Innovation is driven by capitalism, not centralized planning. Please ask someone who lived in the Eastern bloc during the Cold War for their thoughts on centralized planning.

Anyway, while I think this is a nice move by the Obama administration in theory, I really hope it does essentially lead to cutting off the hands of American industries who complete with less regulated foreign corporations. It does no good to impose regulations on American cars if there’s no longer such a thing as American made cars in 10 years. But if the car companies think they’re up to the challenge, let’s see how this turns out.

CCo: “Innovation is driven by capitalism, not centralized planning”

Tell that to NASA, NSA, CIA, FBI, and the office of science.

The only thing Capitalism has given us, is a huge disparity between the haves and have nots. Capitalism has monopolized the energy industry, health industry, and defense industry. Capitalism should be based on competition, yet those with the most power and wealth, continually look to squash competition. That’s where government needs to step in, and level the playing field.

You may be anti-government for many specific reasons, but you continually overlook everything that big business (capitalists) have done TO us, not FOR us.

Let me see if I got this straight. Capitalism has never given us any innovation. The CIA has given us tons.

Let’s see, I forget, was it private enterprise or Federal agencies that gave us Elvis Presley, microwaves, and pony-interior Mustangs?

You know a liberal is grasping at straws when they cite the CIA as a place of innovation. You might want to check with Pelosi on that one dude.

Anonymous– of all of those agencies you cited only NASA comes close to doing anything innovative…They were innovative b/c the government got out of NASA’s way while they let the scientists at the organization do their own thing. The feds certainly set goals and deadlines, but how NASA met those goals or thought up solutions to them was entirely on NASA’s end; it wasnt dictated to them how they were to do things. Thus NASA was relatively free to think up the Saturn V rocket, the Voyager Probes, Velcro, Tang, and put men on the moon.

You are certainly right that Govt ought to play a regulatory role, similar to a ref in a ball game, but where one ought to disagree is when the Government starts making its business to dictate how businesses ought to be run and how their products should be made; and what products should be made, instead of allowing the free market to do so. I’m perfectly fine with Obama dictating to GM and Chrysler how to spend bailout money, but to take over the companies and dictate how they should be run strikes me as inherently anti-business and delves into the shaky realm of central planning (which, as Eastern Europe can attest, hasnt worked so well), which has a notoriously bad record.

That said, lets see how it turns out…but this all gives me a bad feeling in my gut, not only concerning the money involved, but how we pay for it, as well as issues of competition…let us see

Ooops,
I think many in here understand the idea of letting us drive they type and size of cars and trucks that we want to drive..
Oh, and some guy by the name of Obama Rama Ding Dang is not going to change our minds about what we want to drive.
Nope,, He’s not going to tax increase those of us out of our hummers..
We’re going to vote his ass and his party out of office way before that happens.
Republicans are going to benefit??
Someone is,, because one side or the other is going to start ” LISTENING TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE “..
And when they do..
Washington is going to be a whole new ball game..

Jed Clampett

Actually, the CIA has been a great place for innovation. The money they spend to support their operations b.uys them a lot of skilled scientists that make smaller and smaller cameras, listening devices, sig ops technology to listen in on cell phones, as well as state of the art stuff the public will never know about. They have developed advanced satellite imagery and communications interception and an.alysis tools, including some awesome network programming. I’m surprised you are such a nationalist and fail to see the advances your institutions make. The problem is not success, it’s how it is attained, and if it’s done in a bad way, it’s probably for a bad purpose, typically the rule. Your nations character is how all this ‘intellingence’ is applied, how it is used. Were you to use the economic power of this co.untry for helping humanity and the biosphere we could probably save our planet, all one has to do is try.

The more leeway you give a tyrant because of his wealth, the more he will increase his power and influence over others, either through coersion or extortion, he’ll be that much harder to stop. Look what the GUVERNATOR just did in Cali, the machine finally shows it’s true colors. Doesn’t want to follow the rules of the stimulus disbursements, so he threatens to release prisoners, let cops go for lack of funds and close schools. Aimed right for all the things the people need in a time of such coming hardship. What a bunch of maroons, see, that is extortion, and it’s used to sidestep the laws that have been accepted by all of us as civilized behavior.

Cco,

It’s true that in the Capitalist USA there are some that amass great wealth but the difference between the halve nots in the US and the halve nots in non Capitalist countries is staggering. That’s why they are all trying to come here. Compared to them the poor in this country are living in luxury. You want to level the playing field so that we are all as poor as them? And then we would have no middle class, just the few wealthy govt connected and the rest of us poor.
Take off your anti US blinders and get real. Only a fool would put that much trust in government.

Wow, Sooth. Did you have to prepare notes to make that statement? Still not sure what it’s supposed to mean……
I guess I’ll have to email Pelosi and ask her about innovation in the C.I.A. I’m sure you’re right though…..I’m sure there’s been ZERO innovation in the C.I.A. I bet they’re still using empty cans and a string to monitor people.

Our country needs cheap energy to help us turn the economy around so why not use the energy we already have? We have enough oil in the Williston/Bakken oil basin to tide us over until we can develop natural gas for autos? I read the oil there is cheaper than Eastern oil and would create jobs here at home ant not send our money overseas. Our becoming energy independent is not going to happen over night so why not start a few nuclear energy plants to tide us over. Plan on wind energy in the central plains and slowly develop the system .

Many of the people starving are doing so for a good reason, their governments take a large part of donated foods for them selves and allow only a small part to be passed on the the population. Some countries will not even allow US AID or the red cross to be in charge of the very food they are giving out, the country takes control of all of the food. You can not stamp out starving people.

The Borgen Project has good info on the estimated cost of ending global poverty:

$30 billion: Annual shortfall to end world hunger.
$550 billion: U.S. Defense budget.

Jed – I have no problem with people trying to find a way to end world hunger. I think its a noble endeavor, highly unlikely, but certainly noble. However, throwing money at a problem is not going to solve it. These statistics that people keep posting from the Borgen Project are only one very miniscule portion of the solution. For example, who is going to grow and cultivate all the food, who is going to deliver the food, who is going to make sure that the food makes it to the people that need it and isn’t stolen by warlords a la Somalia? Who is going to come in and educate these backwards people and teach them to become more independent? We can’t even convince our own people living in poverty here to stop having children that they can’t afford or take care of, how are we going to convince entire countries?

Mad magazine useta have their own version of Ripley’s…”Believe it, or Don’t”

Put me as a non-believer, Tim.

“The impacts will be extraordinary — saving consumers nearly $3,000 over the life of a car in gas savings”

I’m sure I’m not the first to point out that the Prius, for one, already exists, but either doesn’t suit, or is not everyone’s cup of tea slash kool aid.

And speaking of kooling, how about that damn planet, Earth. Koolin’ down for, what is it now, eleven years straight.

Pardon the mockery, or don’t. I sense your sincerity, but I’m sincere when I say you’re missing the boat on the “game changer” du jour. I propose that the biggest game changer of the last week, or so, involved the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and Maureen Dowd, with a dash of Props. 1E through 1F. Call a C-change. As opposed to L, of course.
Mel Brooks’s 2000 year old man claimed Joan of Arc used to walk around sayin’ “I gotta save France.” For you Tim, and others, who might say “I gotta save the planet”, I’ll steal Mel’s punch line…..”I gotta wash up. Her in her way, me in mine.”

“I propose that the biggest game changer of the last week, or so, involved the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and Maureen Dowd, with a dash of Props. 1A through 1F. Call it a C-change. as opposed to L, of course.”

Rick, maybe you’d like to explain to us your fervent desire to refute better gas mileage and less emissions. As if it’s a bad thing to import less gas, and spew fewer greenhouse gases.

And, I think you’d be quite surprised to see how many priuses are on the road in california.

But, I’ll wait, ever so anxiously, for your reasoning for being against better mpg and less emissions……….

John Boner– So long as the free market and consumer demand are driving the need for Prius’s, then there is no problem. However, it becomes a problem when someone outside a business dictates how their products should be made, rather than market forces…and depends on what part of CA you’re in; theres still plenty of trucks/SUV’s out in Bakersfield, Riverside, and Fresno, where they serve a practical purpose.

If people dont want a Prius, whether for business or local practical needs (such a people in rural areas) shouldnt be forced to b.uy one simply because companies are mandated to make them, whether the consumer asked for it or not…no one is against lower emissions or better mpg, but at least allow people the choice to have a gas guzzler if they so choose.

What I was sayin’, stiffie, is this:

1. I’m not down with anthropogenic climate change, formerly known as global warming.

2. I’m against the federal government putting unreasonable (only in my opinion, of course) regulations on our auto makers.

3. We agree on the Prius. It’s ever so available…why insist Detroit compete with it, beyond what they choose to, in the course of free enterprise?

4. My bigger point, was to share my joy…ok, shadenfreude…in seeing liberal agendas and officeholders take big time hits in the past week. I mean no disrespect to you who support them. I don’t demean your beliefs. I just don’t share them.

Señor Boner. Submitted for your approval, or, at least perusal. Purpose: Self expression.

The making of a neocon… if being new to conservatism qualifies me for that label.

I’m battin’ .181 in Presidential elections, after having chosen, humphrey, mcgovern, CARTER, carter, mondale, dukakis, bush, dole, BUSH, kerry, mccain.

Three things might stand out in that list. Carter is every conservative’s pick as the worst president ever. Likewise GW for most current liberal thinkers. So I’ve got that going for me. Standout number three would be John Kerry, don’t you think? I voted for him because, for the first time in my life, in the summer of 2002, or was it 2003, I felt I had to speak out. I wrote a, how did you put it…fervent email to President Bush allowing as how I could not support him in 2004 if he sent our troops into Iraq. For me, civilian casualties was the dealbreaker. So I kept my word, held my nose, and voted for Kerry, since any other seemed like a throwaway.
Over time (and I’m not referring to that great, gut wrenching tune by Lucinda Williams) I’ve come to believe that President Bush, and the Congress who agreed with him made the right move. Call it a debate for another day.
Finally, I’d like to ask a favor of you. Google “David Mamet + brain dead liberal” Read the article he wrote in the Village Voice several years ago. Just for the hell of it. It may not resonate with you as it did with me, but no matter. We, of opposite sides in our warts and all two party system, both agree on hope. It’s the change part that sticks in each of our craws.

Rick: It’s hard to comprehend such a denial of climate change even though there’s evidence of ice ages. The argument is whether or not the burning of fossil fuels, at this rate, is expediting the next ice age, let alone the health damage smog can do……..

Add to that the hypocricy in American automakers making the largest gas-guzzlers while we import a massive percentage of our oil. It’s a future national security issue, and you’d think conservatives would go along with that.

Jed Clampett and Coach—we know you are on Rolling Stone’s payroll.

Jed Clampett

Weather your ‘down with it’ or not, it’s gonna come down on you just as hard as the rest of us.
The destruction of the forests, damming of rivers preventing the reverse flow within water and the changing of the electric charge of the atmosphere by loading it with carbon may not seem ‘anthropogenic’ to you, but I tend to wonder what other ‘natural process’ could be this destructive to the living system we call Earth and some of us call home.
Earth is like a battery whose capacitance is determined by the electrical makeup of the atmosphere as the strength of the dielectric determines the strength of a battery. This battery produces life in all it’s forms by harnessing the energy of the sun. Why are we killing he battery that lights our way through the dark universe?

ok jed. points taken. my position is that environmental warriors have created quite a few alarmists. (cf: swine flu) Certain unnamed politicians see a voter base growing. One of them even made millions of bucks on the deal. so they stir the pot.

they (or your own personal research) have you absolutely convinced we need to take some action lest we kill our “battery”.
so you’ll vote for them.

i’m skeptical that changes in the weather signify “killing the battery.” humans occupy what, fifteen percent of the planet? are we that powerful, that we’re going to make this place go dark?

so, as i act locally…recycle, avoid waste, and so on…i think nationally, not globally.

Remember this: The article had a headline. “Change We Can Believe In” The last one…well it should have been one…two were…Elections have consequences.
And this is a game changer.

So we’re talking about politics as well as the obvious “it’s better to get thirty miles to the gallon than ten or fifteen,”

Since I don’t worry, even a little bit, about darkness befalling either of us, or the swine flu for that matter, I focus on the politcal. I worry about the trillion dollar congress and the rookie in the White House. (He does seem to be learning, though…taking a page or two from the good old “Bush/Cheney Playbook” in re military tribunals, not closing Guantanmo, letting “conditions on the groud” as opposed to whatever that campaign promise he made to his constituency…here it is: “Let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end.” I worry about being forced to buy health insurance, pay higher taxes, and similarly mundane issues.

For my money, Jed, it’s the sun, not the earth, that lights our way through the dark universe, and it’s going to die one day, as surely as we’re both yapping.

72 is the new 65. Social Security wise. That’s my other big issue.

Any thoughts?

Jed Clampett

Your position is that politics, or rather the ascent of power of the party you support, trumps all else. I can understand that, some have forgotten what is appropriate and replaced it with unnecessary distractions. Some folks buy into it hook line and sinker. Since I don’t give a damn about either party, merely bringing our planet back from the brink, so your petty little distractions are nothing to me but kabuki theater of a dead man, since you must be dead to accept that what the world is being turned into is good for you.

Jed Clampett

SWIM, with that attitude, it’s definitely not going to be you or your political allies that effect that change.

David has only posted two values, what it would cost to feed the world as compared with what we spend on murdering people with greater efficiency and in larger numbers.
Who’s going to feed them? the land, we must merely give them seed and the appropiate tools to make it. Give a man a fish…(do you know the rest?)
You see them as backwards, i venture to say they are heartier than you, they can survive in extremely hard conditions, you couldn’t survive without cable; considering your comfortable, reality isolated television fueled life, I wonder how you can have the impetus to call people you can’t even understand ‘backwards’.

Who will pay for it? We all will if we don’t help them (remember the Taliban?), they will become violent and irrational in their despair and will lash out at whomever they perceive to be the cause of their troubles. Consider it an investment that will be payed back with greater productivity and perhaps advancement. Who knows, we might help the next Einstein survive life in Somalia, and he could provide us with a new energy production method.
What if they steal it? Well, given how your kind is given to stealing, I can understand your concern. Must be hard to live in peace when you think all others are as mean and selfish as you. When the RUSSIANS blockaded Berlin, we spared no cost or effort to feed the people, not even the might of the Russian military deterred us from helping our fellow human beings. Some was stolen, yes, but we still achieved the goal, to keep the people of Berlin from falling into the hands of tyrants.

Wow, it’s amazing that in such a short time the US has gone from confronting tyrants to supporting them and adopting their techniques and ideologies. Shameful at best.

Well Jed, you win. You busted my chops with “strength of the dielectric” in round one, then nailed me with “kabuki theater of a dead man” in round two.

Back to my petty little distractions I go.

Jed Clampett

It’s been four days now since we learned that a group of America’s billionaires met in secrecy. That’s all we were told, not what the agenda was; what conclusions were reached; what compromises where made to benefit the majority. As such, we are left to imagine and speculate what the reason for and outcome of such a meeting would be.
Does it not seem strange that the ‘liberal’ media has not made it more their mission to find out what conclusions they came to rather than the tabloid like focus on the superficial (they met, so what is the news worthiness of that)? If we were to turn the papparazzo loose on the politicians and Oligarchy, perhaps we would see a change in behaviour brought on by the shame of exposure. Would it be too much to bear for the public to learn of Bill Gate’s excesses as compared with the anti-competitive nature of the way he built his monopoly and how he prevented the emergence of competing operating systems and other innovations useful to humanity. Or how the companies that Buffet controls are doing their damnd best to monopolize the world’s resources and denying the residents of those areas the benefit of the processing of the resources of their lands.

I wonder if these ‘billionaires’ concluded that with their economic might they could make poverty a thing of the past and level the playing field for everyone and still maintain their lavish, enriching, educative, stimulating ways of life. Could they have reached the conclusion that it is in everyones best interest that no one is so poor and destitute that they would be willing to strap on a bomb and kill themselves and others to raise awareness of their situation; did they conclude that gross disparity of happiness equity creates the conditions which evil men exploit to create conflict and wars?
I doubt it, otherwise the meeting would have never been so secretive and devoid of any report of a plan of action.
So, let’s open a discussion of what could be the motivator and results of such a meeting. They have left a vacuum of information that begs to be filled. Absent any real information, we are left to conjecture what might have happened there.
Fire away with your guesses, cynisisms, recriminations and speculation. Let’s start a wave here that starts a real discussion on wether these folks are responsible enough to be entrusted with the wealth of the planet..
Keep in mind the words of the old billionaire, William Randolf Hearst… “What would be better for America: to let one man have five million a year, and keep ten thousand men on the edge of want; or let the one man have one million a year and divide the four millions among ten thousand families?”.
Hearst was a child of privilege that chose to use the power he was entrusted with to expose the exploiters and abusers of power. Perhaps this is an example that should be rea$sessed. Lets not forget this is a path many wealthy have taken before, to use their wealth to help the poor and destitute among us, a path established by Buddha a very long time ago.

Could this be the type of ‘Change we can Believe in” or merely another collusion to use the power of the purse to further monopolize power and wealth into single points of failure?

Jed, it’s actually quite simple, and not cynical. It’s called preservation of wealth. They see, as we all should by now, a transfer of leverage in this country away from oil and coal. They want to make sure they’re still a part of, or ringleader of, the ‘neo-oligarchy’……..

It is just a ploy by the drive-by liberal media to make us think that the Democrats are doing anything worthwhile to help America

There’s that phrase again: ‘liberal media’.

Versus what? Conservative (witholding facts) media?

I guess the ‘liberal media’ missed on the peddling of the Iraq war, huh?

There’s media, which is supposed to be liberal in presenting the facts, and there’s conservative media which deals in propoganda, Orwellian style.

I’ll take the liberal media, thank you.

Mayday– There is no such thing as a conservative media or a liberal media, the press/media is merely an entity that has specific interests and tailored markets, and thus news with certain angles tailored for each market.

Radio is overwhelmingly conservative, while most print and primary TV networks are liberal leaning (though many are centrist, such as ABC, and CNN’s straight-up news), with the exceptions of Fox, which leans right, and MSNBC which is pretty liberal.

The internet is the great equalizer…you can literally find an entire spectrum of views and political ideas running from the good to the completely kooky. Depending on how you look at it, it is either a giant miasma of markets, or it is marketless, governed by intellectual anarchy (which is both good and bad)

So this idea that the “mainstream” media (whatever that means) is one unified front that thinks en masse along either conservative or liberal lines is a bit ridiculous…its merely a talking point to score political favors on both sides, while destracting from the real issues. Our press is not so much beholden to the truth or critical reporting as it is following its own agenda, which is usually, but not always, the bottom dollar.

Jed Clampett

Well, I was hoping there would be more folks that considered it important, I guess it’s not worth worrying about what the BillionHares are doing.

I’m a bit of a cynic as well, particularly when it comes to people who have placed themselves someplace way more worthy than the rest of humanity.
However, I am hopeful that they are starting to recognize how deep the hole humanity is in right now and are willing to use their extreme wealth to actually do something helpful… and I don’t mean give a few people a car for the PR it gets them.

Would be nice if they did decide to invest in those off the wall technologies that would disrupt our dependence on power companies for energy. That’s the key there, the oligarchy has put all it’s chips on oil and gold and coal, make a small, cheap power plant, and that house of cards falls faster than the subprime loan market and credit default swaps.

Jed, I am all for giving a hand up (or teaching a man to fish), I am vehemently against giving a hand out, especially in situations where it’s evident the money will be wasted. And I do consider any people that don’t have the good sense to stop having children they cannot afford as backwards (and you bet I include those in this country as well), just as I do those that refuse to give women the same rights as men, or find nothing wrong with mutilating the genitals of young girls, or fail to develop essential infrastructure, etc. Maybe to you those things are okay, but to me that certainly constitutes a backward society. And we can throw as much money at the problem as we want, but until those countries take steps like root out the corruption in their governments, curb their out of control birth rate, etc., nothing will change for them.
And if those people were so hearty Jed, they wouldn’t need our assistance now would they? By the way, I didn’t have cable for the first 18 years of my life and I’ve lived without television for 18 months, so maybe you shouldn’t assume things about me, because you clearly have no idea.
And if you consider our military defense budget, money “we spend on murdering people,” than I take offense to that on behalf of the friends and family of mine that have served this country in the military. You’re holier than thou attitude and your arrogance are what is shameful.

So why do the consumers outside of the US prefer to purchase vehicles that get excellent MPG ratings? Is it because they are so much more wise and earth friendly than US consumers OR is it because they pay what amounts to $7 per gallon for gas. I will drive a moped if I have to pay $7 – does that make me “green” or just a guy trying to spend less on fule?

Jed Clampett

“Jed, I am all for giving a hand up (or teaching a man to fish), I am vehemently against giving a hand out, especially in situations where it’s evident the money will be wasted.”

You mean like the bail outs to the financial markets that Bush started? Why would people making more than a couple of hundred million a year in personal profits need to be bailed out? But when it was Bush’s deal there was absolutely not even a whimper from SWIM. How odd.

You say you are “all for giving a hand up”, and then proceed to give about five paragraphs of reasons why you would DENY others any as$istance, can you see the incongruence of that? Of course not. Just like you can’t see the cause and effect of American business policies abroad and the anymosity created by America’s support of tyrants and bullies; then American’s wonder why they were attacked? America has been assaulting the poor and downtrodden for a long time, that’s why she must build huge armies to protect herself from those her business leaders have wronged.
That’s because America is owned by tyrants and bullies, the populace are merely ignorant spectators who willingly accept any bad behavior by their government merely for comfort and because opposition is difficult, it’s easier to watch TV all day.

Jed, once again you are wrong in your assumptions about me. I was against the bailout of the financial sector and favored what some financial analysts suggested, which is that the market would correct itself as was the case of Lehman Brothers being bought up, which I posted. I found the bailouts to be a smack in the face of personal responsibility and felt those companies got themselves into the mess and would need to get themselves out of it. I’m not a partisan like you Jed, I find fault with both sides.
I don’t disagree that the US has done it’s share of shady $hit, however, I would challenge you to find any other country that has sacrificed as much capital (both dollars and lives) and done more to help others in other countries than the United States. Why don’t you admit it that you just don’t like this country?

OUCH!!!

Here Read:

+ Loophole may mean bigger, not smaller, cars / MSNBC:

–”New rules may actually encourage automakers to build behemoths.”

“Too bad the rules will discourage automakers from manufacturing the kind of small cars that the Obamaites favor and, in some cases, encourage carmakers to do exactly the opposite. That’s right: make some models bigger.”

“… the legislation, while forcing a significant boost in fuel economy, has loopholes big enough to drive a truck through.”

“But say a big SUV misses its target by one mile per gallon. A carmaker could just make the vehicle a bit larger, allowing it to hit an easier fuel economy target.”

“‘The system doesn’t do anything to encourage smaller vehicles,’ … And even if gasoline prices rise again and prompt consumers to look for smaller cars, he says, the new rules give automakers less incentive to sell more of them.”

The cap-and-trade legislation is titled “The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009

Here Read:

+ New climate change legislation overlooks a major GHG source: industrial ag / Grist Magazine:

–”The bill fails to address greenhouse gas emission reductions from agriculture, factory farms, and animal manure whatsoever–and even goes the extra mile to specifically exempt the entire sector from any type of regulation.”

“Enteric fermentation is literally the largest source of methane emissions in the entire country.”

+ EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program / EPA:

–”Municipal solid waste landfills are the second largest source of human-related methane emissions in the United States.”

“At the same time, methane emissions from landfills represent a lost opportunity to capture and use a significant energy source.”

Also read:

+ Beware emissions trading, airlines stand to make billions / Mother Jones,

+ The Carbon Folly / BusinessWeek,

The Case Against Carbon Trading / Transnational Institute:

–”…Citigroup’s Peter Atherton confessed that the European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme had ‘done nothing to curb emissions.’ He admitted,‘Prices up, emissions up, profits up …’ Who wins and loses? Coal and nuclear-based generators–biggest winners. Hedge funds and energy traders–even bigger winners. Losers … Consumers!”
Instead of cap-and-trade, the Govt. should set caps on GreenHouse Gas emission, then provide 0-interest loans for companies to Go Green.

Also Read:

+ From Bagels to Coal Fires: An Unorthodox Economist Keeps Pushing for Change / NY Times, 2007:

–”… the abundance of underground coal fires in abandoned mines and other places that not only waste coal but contribute mightily to worldwide carbon dioxide emissions.”

”… underground fires in China alone contribute as much CO2 to the atmosphere each year as all the cars and light trucks in the U.S.”

Jed Clampett

I was wondering what made you talk out of both sides of your mouth and not even recognize it. I thought perhaps you were just being dishonest with us. But in trying to find out more about why you project your negative qualities onto others and refuse to recognize and atone for the things your nation has done wrong. Then I found an entry for NPD and recognize you and most of the right wingers posting on here.
I feel sorry for you guys, since it seems impossible you will ever recognize your malady and seek help for it. Sad indeed since you’ll be the easiest to manipulate to fight against your own when the time is at hand.

I thought you ignored the important points of a conversation on purpose, it’s evident now you don’t even realize you are doing it; It’s merely an impulse to prove anyone with different views by ignoring the issues.

Jed, I appreciate your concern, but I’m not going to take psychiatric evaluations very seriously from people on the Rolling Stone political blog, and I’m CERTAINLY not going to take said evaluations seriously from YOU. NPD? Care to enlighten us as to what that stands for? In fact, could you please explain your last post in its entirety as it seemed rather incoherent?