| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:33 pm Post subject: Obama Remains “Conspicuously Absent” on Waxman-Markey |
 |
|
We are about to have a house (small "h") vote on "environmental" legislation that will open the door to, perhaps, the greatest, and most odious in its ramifications, federal government power/money grab in our nation's history...all based upon ideologically-driven "junk science".
The American people should be HOWLING for debate on this "environmental trojan horse", yet the passing of this legislation in the house appears to have the hallmark of a "done deal".
While a few voices continue to be heard in opposition...
| Quote: | Obama Remains “Conspicuously Absent” on Waxman-Markey
June 23, 2009
Contact: Matt Dempsey Matt_Dempsey@epw.senate.gov (202)224-9797
WASHINGTON, D.C. -U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, following President Obama’s press conference, said today that the President’s absence from the global warming debate is not surprising. While the President did briefly call for passage of a global warming bill during his press conference today, he has remained “conspicuously absent” from using his “bully pulpit,” as Politico noted, to push for the Waxman-Markey bill. Yet the House Democratic leaders desperately need strong, vocal support from the President in order to pass Waxman-Markey, a fact that demonstrates how tenuous support for the bill really is.
“With the House set to consider a costly global warming cap-and-trade tax this Friday, the big question is whether or not President Obama will engage in the current debate,” Senator Inhofe said. “With no public events of late to showcase this bill, and then giving the bill an endorsement at a White House press conference just days before the vote, it’s clear the President wants to keep a low-profile. It’s not hard to understand why: Waxman-Markey is massive energy tax on American families that will destroy millions of jobs and make America’s businesses and entrepreneurs less competitive in the global marketplace.”
###
Minority Page, US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works |
...call your congresscritters (small "c") and express your personal outrage at this odious legislation and all that it portends.
One small ray of hope...passage of this proposed legislation in the senate (small "s") appears, at this point, to be highly unlikely.
P.S. Lew has a good commentary up on his blog. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmmm, Washington is in the "green". Despite the fact, correct me if I'm wrong Lew, Washington still says its hydroelectric plants are based on a "non-renewable" resource.
The map linked in Lew's blog directly resembles what Obama said a few years ago "We'll tax... (sic) coal producers until they can no longer stay in business" or Biden's little gaff about clean coal. The problem with all that is, the consumers (read american citizens) will be the ones to pay until they've achieved their goal: no coal or oil electricity producers - period.
BTW - shouldn't this bill be more correctly named "Another Waxman malarkey bill" ?
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am unaware of c laims of hydroelectric sources being "unrenewable."
What I do find is claims that the percentage of hydroelectric sources has decreased as consumption has increased.
The Source Of Our Power
The Wall Street Journal Online has a good article out on this folly of a bill,
The Cap and Tax Fiction
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unbelievable that anyone would consider hydroelectric "non-renewable."
Must be the animal rights and environmentalists who want everything put back to hundreds of years ago, except for their convenience of keeping their access to technology.
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You pegged it.
Well yea, fur shure. Don't see much wilderness from the "wilds" of Starbucks. Just as long as their Wi-Fi works, they're happy.
Wonder just how they are going to recharge those snappy electric cars.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dusty
Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 1264
Location: East Texas
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
8 Republican Representatives who need to find themselves out of a job next election.
These 8 voted for this scam.
Chris Smith (NJ)
David Reichert (WA)
Frank Lobiondo (NJ)
Mark Steven Kirk (IL)
Bono-Mack (CA)
Castle (DE)
Leo Lance (NJ)
John M. McHugh (NY)
_________________
Left and Wrong are the opposite of Right! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Theresa Alwood
Rear Admiral
Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Posts: 631
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
President Obama seems to be absent on most controversial subjects these days (well actually....all along....he did not want his name linked with anything that would stand in his way of being elected).
Sad to say this man lacks strength and character to be President of the United States.
_________________
Born to raise a little hell! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, he wasn't absent on this one. Just staying in the shadows and coercing from behind the screens. It was only after it passed Congress that he stepped out into the light. You see, he can not be associated with a failed bill, no matter how odoriferous or unread it might be at this juncture. He has to keep his approval numbers up by only "backing winners".
About the only thing we can hope for now is there will be time for review on this piece of junk legislation - shoot, someone might even READ the thing.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
