This topic can “border” on insanity. It appears that most of the positions we have heard regarding immigration, at least here in the US, are protectionist. This is in direct contrast to the apparent push for “free trade” we covered in our last article.
If you have read our prior articles, you know we love clichés. It is not because we love using them in our writing, but to exemplify that what we are writing about is a well-known topic, something frequently discussed and something likely a key issue.
The United States is referred to as the “melting pot” since the early 1900s. And it is part of what makes us great as a nation, our diversity. There probably isn’t a culture in the entire world that does not have family in the United States.
We realize there are racists and we are probably as guilty as the next guy. Racism plays a huge role in our resistance as a nation to immigration, but is it a practical fear?
“Irish need not apply.” What does that mean? In the 1800s and early 1900s, Irish Immigrants came to the US and were victims of discrimination. Many companies posted the signs, “Help Wanted, Irish Need Not Apply”. No one now would feel that an Irishman did not fit right into the American culture, but one of our Irish grandfathers actually had to change his name to get a job that paid him $10 a month in 1910. He raised a family of 6 that all went on to either become professionals or have children that did, and all of which contribute strongly to our economy.
After all this unfounded prejudice against the Irish, many of us now celebrate Saint Patrick’s Day, end up in an Irish Pub and wear green to honor the Irish? Our point? Substitute any prejudice you have for the word “Irish”. If you thought being racist against the Irish was stupid, it will seem just as stupid being racist against those entering our society now.
Fact is, racist or no, legal immigrants, and in some cases, illegal immigrants, in our country, have vastly helped the US.
There are a number of reasons:
1. New immigrants typically do jobs that we would not do or could not afford to do. We interviewed one immigrant couple that has been here several years and the husband worked three jobs for the entire time. One was a security job where he could catch a few Zs. The wife worked as well while raising four children. Now, they have a nice house, the children have done well in school, and they are all headed for college.
2. Immigration brings in people with desire. These people come here to make a better life for themselves and are willing to work hard for it. That desire makes us competitive as a nation. It does not diminish it.
3. Immigrants pay fees to immigrate to the United States and contribute strongly to our tax base. That helps keep US Taxes lower.
4. Immigrants contribute to Social Security. Our population is not growing all that much organically. We are having fewer children. The immigrants don’t become welfare participants when they enter the US, they are typically aggressive workers that pay taxes and contribute to Social Security. The Baby Boom is over folks, if each family has less and less children, can our descendants be expected to pay for a pyramid scheme like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? The entire system depends on new participants, and if our own population does not supply those participants, where will the taxes come from if we do not immigrate?
5. Some economies have become dependent on “illegal immigrants” so much they are redefining the term. California is so dependent that they actually offer illegals medical benefits and a chance to get a license to drive instead of deporting them. Their economy depends on workers willing to pick fruit, clean bathrooms, do basic construction work to support their families. Why do the immigrants do it? Because it is vastly better than from whence they came, and they can send money to help support their families.
6. Immigration helps other nations. Why should we care? Well, we talk about the benefit of free trade helping both sides, right? Immigration assists those economies not as well off as our own. The people that come here to work and better themselves send money to their families and children at home, and that helps advance and support that economy. Allowing immigration helps eliminate poverty and hunger in the world while it also benefits US!!!
7. The concept of the melting pot makes us less hated throughout the world. The melting pot concept means that we have Muslims in our nation, as well as Asians, Europeans, Mexicans, Portuguese, etc. That helps us be loved at least a bit by those that want a chance to come here and by the families abroad that benefit from at least part of their families being able to come to the US. Then the only ones that hate us are those jealous of our success. OK, there are plenty of those.
What are the implied negatives of immigration?
1. We are importing a bunch of poor that will go on welfare.
2. They are stealing our jobs. We need to provide jobs to Americans not immigrants.
3. Immigration allows terrorists to enter our country.
4. We are racist, and we don’t want those Mexicans, Asians, Africans, South Americans in our neighborhoods. (Substitute Irish to see how stupid this sounds). Think about the huge population of Mexican, Asian, African, and South American citizens that have been here a generation or two and now contribute significantly to our nation as tax paying and voting members of our society.
The schedule for the debates between Senators McCain and Obama are below:
Sept. 26, University of Mississippi in Oxford, Miss.
Oct. 7, Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn.
Oct. 15, Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y.
The Vice Presidential debate between Governor Palin and Senator Biden will be on October 2 at the University of St. Louis.
Each debate will be 90 minutes in length and begin at 9pm Eastern time.
If you are not sure of what channel to watch them on, they will be hard to miss. Just flip the channels and you will find it. Chances are, if you aren’t watching HBO, ShowTime or another movie or specialty channel, you will be watching the debate.
We were hoping, but it won’t be in 3-D this year. They didn’t even make a special version for IMAX! Go figure.
And check back, we will be making up a list of key questions for the candidates we feel need to be covered in the debates. FIND OUR QUESTIONS HERE. You can add your questions in the comments section and WE WILL ADD YOUR QUESTIONS!! They can cover both sides of any issue and be directed at either candidate.
The New York Timesreports we are in a total calamity according to our Federal Reserve.
If indeed this is factual in any way, which in the case of the NY Times, it most often is not, we have to examine how we got here.
We believe the primary cause is our dependency on foreign natural resources because of our NIMBY attitude. We also believe this strongly suggests that Obama is not up for the job. His proposal is to spend nearly the entire deficit on his programs without resolving the economic problems or our trade deficit first.
Obama wants health care that takes on people with pre-existing conditions. This is either a hollow promise or one that puts us in the poor house as a nation. He also wants to convert us over to alternative energy, but again has no plan and would keep on importing our natural resources at a huge rate at the expense of the dollar. He also seems to want to blame our crisis on Republicans when the bulk of the problem was brought on by Alan Greenspan during his tenure along side Bill Clinton (when the stock market bubble occurred).
We believe if the economy is in this dire of a crisis, Obama is the last person we want at the helm. We need to start now to tap our natural resources ASAP, creating American jobs in the process. We cannot be NIMBY now. The government cannot let ecology groups and liberals destroy our economy any longer. Ecology has to take a back seat to economic destruction. If our economy fails, ecology won’t matter one iota.
Reuters Says US Citizens Are Idiots. Hundreds Of Thousands DIE!!
We are seeing articles that totally question the intelligence of the American People. This liberal article tries to make a claim that hundreds of thousands died in a Shiite cleansing (compare that to the total death count of all American Soldiers in the war thus far, 4000 and the number killed in the 9/11 attacks, 3000).
How gullible does the liberal press think we are? Do they honestly believe hundreds of thousands of people were killed and their bodies disposed of in days? And do they have any evidence at all? Must have been one heck of a problem on garbage pick up day. Can’t just put those bodies in the recycle bin. Brings to mind the Monty Python parody, “Bring out your dead”.
Of course, this is all total nonsense… a fabrication to make the war look horrible, to refute the success of the Surge and to support Obama with lies.
This media nonsense should be “cleansed”. Maybe we can get the Shiites to visit Reuters?
So, 60 minutes started off a new season with an interview of the Presidential candidates. Our first reaction was “FANTASTIC!!”. Our second was, “Will CBS be fair?”. The media has gone out of its way to demonstrate its liberal bias this year, and we were hoping CBS would make this a non-biased interview allowing us to get a good feel for the candidates and the issues. We wanted to see if they could take the high road and succeed where so many other news outlets have failed.
We are going to cover these 60 Minutes interviews, and then give you a summary opinion. We will not comment on the interviews themselves until the end, but we will comment on the format of the show as it progresses.
We hope to get responses, especially if you disagree with our interpretation.
Let’s start. Who gets to go first? This is an important decision and an indication of how fair CBS intended to be. Usually the one to go first has the toughest time in comparison to his competitor. This is so true, in fact, that Hillary Clinton quipped about it in her debates and interviews with Obama, because the media often started with Hillary and allowed Obama to follow up. Hillary recognized being continually placed in this weak political position, and called reporters on it.
CBS revealed its liberal bias by having McCain go first. They wanted an Obama finale. It appears that on every network and in every media outlet but Fox, the media continues to give the advantage to Obama and/or the Democrats in general. CBS was no exception.
CBS once again employed another subtle liberal manipulation at the beginning of McCain’s segment. The background was an open book with the pictures of the two candidates. CBS squarely placed Obama’s picture ABOVE that of McCain. Just showing Obama’s picture directly before McCain’s introduction was insult enough; especially when later introducing Obama, they not only did not show McCain above Obama, they didn’t show McCain at all.
McCain began, “There is a social contract that Adam Smith talked about between capitalism and the people. That contract has been broken. It has been broken by greed and excess, aided and abetted by a government in Washington that is dominated by special interests and corruption.”
When asked about the economic bail-out, McCain said, “We are going to take over these bad loans. We are going to take over these bonds and we are going to keep you alive, and we are going to have the tax payer help you out, but when the time comes and the economy recovers, then anything that is gained back is going to go to the taxpayers first.”
McCain admitted he has called for the termination of the head of the SEC, Chris Cox. It has been repeatedly believed by many that the SEC was asleep at the switch as the banks and brokerages robbed the nation blind. “Technically, he cannot be fired, but when I am President, when I want someone to resign, they (will) resign”. When asked who would replace Chris Cox, he said he was impressed with Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat that served in the cabinet of President Clinton.
When asked if he felt the Bush administration has failed, he responded without hesitation or partisanship, “I say the Bush administration has failed, the Congress has failed, Democrats and Republicans. I remind you the Democrats have had the majority in the Congress the last two years, so everyone has failed, and the cozy “old-boy” special interests that have prevailed in Washington have harmed the American people, frankly, in the most terrible fashion.”
He was asked if it was smart to cut taxes while the Federal Deficit was breaking all records, reaching 500 billion dollars, McCain responded , “Spending got out of Control. …the size of government increased by 40% in the last seven years. We Republicans presided over the biggest increase in government since the Great Society, Republicans came to power to change Washington, and Washington changed us.”
How would he pay for the tax cuts?
“You can eliminate so many agencies of government that are outmoded. Obviously I would scrub defense spending, obviously, we would look at every institution of government, I would stop these protectionist tariffs, I would stop subsidizing sugar. I think there are areas in defense where we can save a lot of money in cost over-runs”.
“I would move the political office out of the White House and into the Republican National Committee. I think we have to have a White House that is without Politics”.
When told he was referred to by Obama as President Bush’s third term, he responded, “Spending, the conduct of the war in Iraq, climate change, treatment of prisoners and the 9/11 commission…are a number of issues in which I have stood up to my party”.
When asked about the Surge, McCain said “Many Political Pundits said my campaign was over. Senator Obama moved to the left of his party and said we shouldn’t, said the Surge would fail, said it was doomed to failure, and still fails to acknowledge he was wrong about the Surge.”
In your judgement, can you see her (Sarah Palin) as President of the United States. “Absolutely”.
He said he did support NATO membership for Georgia. “It does not mean that we have to go to war with Russia, it does mean that we have to respond, and that this kind of behavior on the part of the Russians is not the kind of behavior we expect of a country that is a member of the world community”.
When asked if he would turn to preemptive war against Iran, he responded “If it is a provable direct threat. Suppose that the Iranians had nuclear weapons and you had a whole lot of other information about Iranian intentions and you could make a case to the American people and the world, I think it is obvious we would have to prevent what we are absolutely certain is a direct threat to the lives of the American people.”
There you have it, the final five.Bear in mind that not one of these talents is a long term nightly Vegas act except maybe Nuttin But Stringz with a bunch of help.Four out of the five are singers.Dull.This is now, other than NBS, just a singing contest.Sad really with the variety of talents they had on this show, and another reason why we think they should not have singers on the show or at least limit them somehow.This is going to be an amateur American Idol.
But at least the folks that were eliminated this week pretty much made sense, especially the child acts.They weren’t good last night and it would have been a shame to keep them and, Jessica really had to go.
All that said, here is our expected order of the talent
2.Nuttin But Stringz
3.Neil E. Boyd
We expect Eli or NBS to win.We think Queen Emily does not belong on the list, but Donald is boring, so he may not as well.But it doesn’t matter, there is one winner, our money is on Eli.
You could have missed the first 15 minutes and missed nothing.
1. Paul Salos led off. He did New York, New York. He fouled up some parts. He really didn’t sound totally like Frank, but he was pretty good. Then he forgot the words, and had a reasonable finish, but nothing fantastic. Piers actually buzzed him.
2. Kaitlyn Maher was next, and she appeared, with commercials and filler, 8 full minutes after Paul. Bearing in mind these are two minute acts, that says what this show really is. It has become America’s got Ads. At Any rate, Kaitlyn did Call My Name (I’ll Be There), was real cute, her voice was cracking, she was really not good at all. But she has the cute going. If cute is worth a million bucks, she is worth a million. Talent-wise, not much. Other than Piers, they all pandered to her. We thought *TGFFF.
3. It was a full 7 minutes from the time the judges shut up until Donald Braswell came on. He did his usual show tune style music, Broadway style. We would tell you how well he did, but we fell asleep, but we knew we would have plenty of time for a nap given the 7 minute gap between the acts. He was done in 2 minutes. He has a strong voice and could do a Broadway show. He is just so boring.
4. This time, with filler and fluff, it was again 7 minutes before Jessica Price took the stage. She still sounds like a frightened little mouse when she sings. The song is nice, and she has it going OK, but she wouldn’t get to the final 20 in Idol. She had the chorus down nice, and she has a very sexy appeal so someone could make her popular, but it couldn never be purely based on her voice. And she would have to cut a CD first of studio promoted music before anyone would pay to see her on stage.
5. The time, between the commercials, fluff and the next act was, you guessed it, 7 minutes. Joseph Hall started rising in smoke and sang “Satisfy Me”, by, who else, Elvis. He actually had the Elvis act down better this week. He had the stage moves down and seemed comfortable performing them. As before, though, when he hits the real hard notes, he ain’t Elvis, but he is entertaining and the ladies are crazed about him.
6. 7 more minutes… Neil E. Boyd began. He did “All By Myself”. Going for the powerful chorus, but the slow parts were a bit harsh to listen to. The chorus did not show off his powerful voice as well as it could, but he did take the opportunity to hit a few power notes and had a strong finale. We like him, but find him boring like Donald Braswell. But we are pulling for him because he really could use the money for donuts.
7. 8 minutes of commercials and fluff to the Wright Kids. The kids started with another kids tune. “ABC”. Lead was flat for the first verse. Chorus OK, but clearly not Jackson Five Quality. The performance had no energyand was very boring. Poorly done. We thought they had it going last week. They lost it this week, and it was not the time to lose it.
8. They only got to 6 minutes wasted before they brought on Queen Emily. We were impressed. With the gap, not Emily, only 6 minutes, wow!! She sang “You’re Going To Love Me”. She pushed it and was driving a bit too hard, yelling at times. We know the lady can wale, and she was better than she was last week, but she is not at the same level of talent as the women she imitates and she was trying too hard. We think she is entertaining, but wouldn’t pay to see her. Still, she will likely make the top 5 given the screw up eliminations from last week.
9. Six more minutes and it was time for Nuttin But Stringz. We really like this duo, and we were expecting them to deliver huge. They started off with a marching drum sort of group to build things up. We still cannot place what it is that is entertaining about them. They did have to bring in more fluff like gals hanging from scarfs and swinging from the rafters, but that is typical Vegas stuff. By the time they were done, these guys had their bow strings all shredded. We did not like them as much as last week, but we liked them bunch none the less.
10. Seven minutes to Eli Mattson. He did an Elton Song “Sorry Seems To Be The Hardest Word”. He should be a cinch for the final, but he needs to bring it big next week. This week he was a tad on the boring side.
If you do not have a DVR and you like this show, get one. We watched a two hour show that had 20 minutes of performance in it. That left 1 hour and fourty minutes of filler, most of it painful commercials and fluff of approximately 7 minutes between each act. TGFFF is worth every penny, even if you just get to skip Jerry.
Our contestant order and scores:
1. Eli Mattson (8/10)
2. Nuttin But Stringz (8/10)
3. Neil E. Boyd (8/10)
4. Queen Emily (7/10)
5. Joseph Hall (7/10)
6. Paul Salos (7/10)
7. Donald Braswell (7/10)
8. Jessica Price (6/10)
9. Wright Kids (6/10)
10. Kaitlyn Maher (6/10)
Our definite eliminations this week are the child acts. This week, for them to get to the finals, they would have to get major child sympathy. Neither act was good.
Jessica should not be here and lucked out last week getting cast on the first night when the talent was so very weak. She is pretty, but she is just really not that good. Maybe she could be better in a studio and with singing training. She doesn’t have a horrible voice, but she isn’t at Eli’s, Neil’s or even Emily’s level. But she has a look that could be played up if she found her niche. Maybe she could even step into Idol after a year of singing lessons.
Our definite winners this week are Eli Mattson, Nuttin But Stringz and Neil E. Boyd. All performed up to par and all deserve a berth in the finals, even though we think none could do an hour long Vegas act day after day.
The most talented of the remaining three is Donald Braswell. He could do Broadway, but he is a tad old for that and we wouldn’t pay to see just him sing. Joseph Hall does a mean Elvis, but he doesn’t sing extremely well. But man oh man does he get the girls going. Paul Salos does a pretty good impersonation of Frank. And we could picture him as a background act in Vegas. It is a shame they displaced such great talent last week due to the poor format, or we wouldn’t have such a poor group of finalists to choose from.
Hmmm. We are going to cop out and let you choose. Vote for your favorite among our bottom three.
1. Paul Salos
2. Joseph Hall
3. Donald Braswell
4. Other (you think one of our eliminations belongs in the finals)
Senator Obama believes that America must commit to a new national energy policy focused on improvements in technology, investments in renewable fuels such as wind and solar power, and greater efforts in conservation, efficiency, and waste reduction. Shifting from our current investment and consumption practices to this new direction will be one of the great leadership challenges in the coming decade.
Wow, amazing how much that sounds like McCain’s policy. Do they have the same writers?
With the Department of Energy telling us that U.S. demand for oil will jump 40% over the next 20 years and with countries like China and India adding millions of cars to their roads, the price of oil is approaching a breaking point.
Point taken (pun intended), but the fact is as our economy weakened and our demand for oil waned, oil prices collapsed nearly immediately from nearly $150 a barrel to under $100. China and India had nothing to do with it. As we clearly demonstrated in our prior articles, we dwarf the usage of these countries and likely will for the next decade.
In addition to the high economic costs of our foreign oil dependence, the current consumption of fossil fuels has threatened the future health and well-being of not only our citizens, but our natural resources and air quality as well. Investments in cleaner and more efficient energy technologies must play a central role in mitigating these threats to our health and our environment.
Agreed, but the NIMBY environmentalists won’t even let you put in Wind Farms. Where will we place these technologies, in outer space? Is Nuclear on your list?
Recognizing the importance of energy security to national and economic security, Senator Obama has proposed the creation of a Director of National Energy Security in the Office of the President. This position, akin to the National Security Advisor, would oversee and coordinate all administration efforts on national energy security and policies.
Another reference by a candidate to “energy security” instead of “energy independence”. The latter will automatically lead to the former, and no assigned “Director” can change that fact.
Senator Obama is a leading advocate for increasing the use of renewable fuels to reduce our nation’s reliance on foreign petroleum. In 2005, he enacted into law a tax credit for installing E-85 ethanol refueling pumps at gas stations across the country.
Fact is ethanol and methanol have proven to be a joke. We cannot generate enough from products we depend on for food, it is more expensive than gasoline and it pollutes just as much if not more. It is “renewable”, but we can’t renew it fast enough, so it is pointless.
In the 109th and 110th Congress, he joined with Senator Lugar to introduce the American Fuels Act to increase domestic production, distribution, and end uses of biofuels. Among other improvements, the American Fuels Act would expand the manufacture of ethanol-capable vehicles, offer tax credits to spur cellulosic fuel production, require clean-fueled transit buses bought with federal dollars, and provide incentives to ethanol plants to invest in E-85 blending equipment on their premises.
Ethanol is a joke. We would love to see alternate fuels adopted, but that has to be incorporated with a plan to use our own resources of fossil fuels and drop our trade deficit, or we will be so poor, we won’t have the funds to pursue alternative sources of energy at all. Certainly, that will reduce our usage, but we don’t consider poverty for Americans a viable solution.
Alternative fuels like hydrogen and natural gas are great, but are you so naïve as to believe this can be accomplished within any reasonable time frame? Our cars and the trucks that deliver most of our products throughout the world do not run on bio-diesel, hydrogen or natural gas. Are we to phase them out? By when? Will the US help pay for the trucking industry to transition from diesel to alternative energy sources and where will these alternate energy sources come from?
This is all a pipe dream Senator with no real plan.
As the author of the Fuel Economy Reform Act, Senator Obama has worked to gain bipartisan support for an innovative approach to raising automobile fuel efficiency standards (also known as “CAFE” standards) and break two decades of inaction and deadlock on reforming fuel economy laws. This proposal has attracted cosponsors from both parties – maintaining support from long-time champions of improving fuel economy standards while attracting support from traditional opponents. The bill would establish regular, continual, and incremental progress in miles per gallon fuel efficiency by an increase of four percent annually, and preserve flexibility by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to vary the rate of improvement and how best to technologically achieve those fuel economy targets. President Bush endorsed a similar approach in his State of the Union speech in January 2007.
We agree that improving fuel efficiency is a great thing, but it is naïve as well. People buy larger vehicles because they need them. Trucks can carry things, a Geo Prism cannot. SUVs cater to families, the Honda Civic does not. There is nothing you can do about that short of dramatically changing the way cars are built. More hybrids, fine, but who will pay for that? They cost vastly more than regular fuel vehicles, don’t get anywhere near the gain in fuel economy as they imply (20% is often the gain, it would take the entire life of the car to save back the fuel difference), and leave us with hazardous waste (the battery) every few years. In addition, the complexity of the manufacturing process for these automobiles and their replacement battery packs emits more Carbon Dioxide than the fuel savings garnered from the electric motor, so you are solving nothing.
There are other technologies, but none are practical at this time. We would like you to be more explicit, because if we are talking ethanol again, we have a real beef with your plan Senator.
Investing in New Technologies
Senator Obama introduced the “Health Care for Hybrids Act” to provide health care assistance to domestic automakers in exchange for their investing 50% of the savings into technology to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles. His proposal has been praised by President Bill Clinton, the University of Michigan’s auto research center, and numerous newspapers.
In May 2007, Senator Obama, along with Senator Harkin, authored the National Low Carbon Fuel Standard Act (S. 1324), which requires a 10% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the national transportation fuel pool by 2020, a reduction of about 180 million metric tons of emissions in 2020 – the equivalent of taking over 30 million cars off the road. The Obama-Harkin fuel standard embraces the growth of the renewable fuels market, including corn-based ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, and biodiesel as a key component of fighting climate change, while creating incentives for lower carbon emissions in their production.
Praised by Bill Clinton? Pshaw. Why would Bill Clinton praise a Democrat? Never happen.
Interesting numbers thrown out, but no different from what John McCain has stated and no more realistic. Can you think of a reason the rest of the world hasn’t done this Senator when we already import most of our cars? Is it because they are dunces? Of course not. It is because it isn’t practical. Automobiles are manufactured and sold worldwide. If the nations that build our cars could come up with such technologies, don’t you think they would have by now? Japan already makes the best hybrids, not the US.
It is cute to offer US Automakers a discount to produce cleaner and more fuel efficient cars, if they all weren’t nearly bankrupt because they cannot build decent cars in the first place. I don’t think many Americans want to add more complexity to the automobile they purchase from Ford or GM when they have enough trouble with quality as it is. Maybe you can instead give the tax discount to the Japanese?
Working to Lower High Gas Prices
Oil companies are enjoying record profits while consumers are suffering from record high gas prices. In the 110th Congress, Senator Obama has introduced the Oil SENSE Act to eliminate unnecessary tax breaks to the oil industry. A version of the bill was passed by House of Representatives in January 2007.
In the 109th Congress, Senator Obama sponsored legislation, the FILL UP Act, requiring oil companies that made at least $1 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2006 to invest at least 1% of the their total reported first quarter 2006 profits into installing E-85 pumps.
Senator Obama also worked with Congressman Rahm Emanuel to obtain several million dollars to establish the first ethanol-to-hydrogen refueling station for refueling Chicago natural gas bus fleets.
All wrong. If you want to impose a tax on Oil companies, we are all for it. Make them build some refineries and drill responsibly and tap resources to use our current technologies. You can force them to invest in natural resources, but you can’t force a NIMBY population to allow you to even install wind power.
It all comes down to priorities Senator. Priority one. Energy Independence. Priority two. Energy Alternatives for electricity and heating piercing NIMBY conservationist groups. Priority three. Building an infrastructure for alternative fuels, but not ethanol or methanol, they just aren’t practical.
Senator McCain is the only one that has the foresight to realize that all our cars, hundreds of millions of them, are powered by gasoline. All our trucks that deliver products in the US are powered by diesel. Most of our electricity and heating comes from burning coal, oil or natural gas.
It is not practical to think that within any reasonable time frame we can change that. It is not realistic and it would destroy our economy in the process. It places the entire burden on us to convert while continuing to pay foreign nations for our current resources and maintain a huge trade deficit to do so. It is not a financially viable solution.
When you have run up your debt and you can’t pay the bills, you can do one of two things, try to pay down your debt and get control of your finances, or you can declare bankruptcy. We believe the only way to approach this problem is to reduce our dependency on an ever-growing importation of an international supply of natural resources.
This is vastly more practical and can be done with our current infrastructure and not with incredible expense to the citizen to convert cars, trucks and buses to use alternative fuels that would likely cost us more than gasoline. Building the infrastructure, converting our cars, converting our energy plants will cost an astronomical amount of money. Where will that money come from if we do not first get our trade deficit under control?
Round 4: McCain (but we want to see less pandering, the liberals are delusional here, McCain must point it out)