|
16 Jun 10 - 08:46 PM (#2929492) Subject: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: ichMael Obama spoke close to 2,700 words in his first Oval Office address, which can be separated into four broad themes: an update the oil spill and clean up efforts; the impact on the Gulf region; a history of regulatory ineffectiveness (Bush bashing); and the case for his "green energy" agenda. Here is how the sections breakdown in words spoken on each: • 345 words blaming Bush • 418 words on the impact to Gulf region • 778 words on the oilspill and cleanup efforts • 863 words on Obama's "green energy" agenda Clearly, the president's number one priority in making this speech was to make the case for his high tax, command and control, lifestyle changing, carbon regulating energy plan. Moreover, Obama placed his 863 words on "green energy" at the end of his address. In so doing, the president orgnized the speech on the principles of inductive logic - in which the bad news comes first in order to soften the impact of the proposed solution. Everything which comes before his pitch for "green energy" is properly seen, then, as support for Obama's proposal. The crisis, the impact, the lives of those affected, all props in Obama's drive to remake the nation's energy policy. Last night, Obama revealed himself to be nothing more than a snake-oil salesman. He knows that the public does not want his energy-limiting scheme, but he is determined to force it on America using the worst environmental tragedy in the nation's history as the hook. Never let a crisis go to waste. http://www.redstate.com/mark_i/2010/06/16/obama-speech-breakdown/ |
|
16 Jun 10 - 08:49 PM (#2929495) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Don Firth You have far too much time on your hands, ichMael. Don Firth |
|
16 Jun 10 - 09:13 PM (#2929502) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Arkie No question about the public not wanting his energy saving program. The public did not want it when Jimmy Carter proposed cutting back on energy and searching for alternatives to petroleum in the 1970s. They would not want it now even if republicans who are determined to feed the fat cats at the expense of the country or petroleum lobbyists were to remain silent. Some of the public would not want it anyway. He is certainly contemptible the way he is using a crisis to do something that will benefit the country and make the future less threatening. If only he was as honorable as the Bush-Cheney administration who used a national crisis to make war on Iraq to return the Iraqi oil field to BP. |
|
16 Jun 10 - 09:33 PM (#2929504) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: catspaw49 Well Ickylimpdickmicky.....Looks like the time for you to start some more blog pages or whatever ta' hell it is you do. I trust they are at least of the same sort of fuckwit nonsense you ramble on about here so that anyone dropping by your blogs can easily see what a dipstick you are. Spaw |
|
16 Jun 10 - 09:38 PM (#2929506) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Greg F. Screw saving energy. Buy A Hummer For Jesus- that's the American way. |
|
16 Jun 10 - 09:44 PM (#2929510) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Beer Are you saying that this is Obama and not the party he represents? Beer |
|
16 Jun 10 - 10:06 PM (#2929516) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: GUEST,Riginslinger At this point in time, it seems to me like the oil spill in the gulf has done more damage to Obama than Katrina did to Bush. |
|
16 Jun 10 - 10:09 PM (#2929518) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Bobert Well, itchy is kinda like Lyndon LaRouche... I mean, he/she starts out makin' a litle sense and then LaRouche takes over with the proverbial "Nancy Reagan is part a the Columbian drug cartel"... You know, stuff like that... Kinda 1 + 1 = 23... I donno??? B~ |
|
16 Jun 10 - 10:10 PM (#2929519) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Alice Don't you mean 1+1=11? |
|
16 Jun 10 - 10:11 PM (#2929521) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Alice Sorry, didn't mean to feed this silly thread. |
|
16 Jun 10 - 10:19 PM (#2929525) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Bobert Well yeah, Alice, you've been lookin' in my trick bag... Technically speakin' "one plus one" and "one and one" ain't exactly the same... I like to use that on younginz... Hurts their little heads... Good... B~ |
|
17 Jun 10 - 07:54 AM (#2929758) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Greg F. it seems to me like the oil spill in the gulf has done more damage to Obama than Katrina did to Bush... As I mentioned elsewhere, what was Prez Obama supposed to DO, exactly? Have the Enterprise seal the leak with photon torpedo & have Scotty beam the oil slick into deep space, widest possible dispersion? |
|
17 Jun 10 - 08:11 AM (#2929769) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: artbrooks It is well known that Mr. Obama is doing nothing. Someone else put the Coast Guard and National Guard out there. Somebody else has tens of thousands of people out working on the booms, the oil suckers and the initial phases of clean-up. Someone else got Yes, it took a while to realize the true scope of the disaster. The wellhead is over a mile underwater. Comparisons to Katrina are fallacious - you could see the damaged caused in New Orleans. What more do you want? Is Obama ultra-deep scuba certified? Should he swim down and put his finget in the hole? |
|
17 Jun 10 - 08:23 AM (#2929778) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Bobert The major differencde between Katrina and now is that with Katrina there was this National Response Plan that the Bush administartion developed after 9/11 which wasn't followed and with the oil spill the only folks who have the resorces, assets an know-how are the oil folks themseles... ...or maybe someone expects the federal government to creat a Department of Oil Spills, fund it with a couple hundred billion dollars a year and get into ther oil spill business??? I mean, sure, if folks want to use federal tax dollars that way then I'd say that the federal government should just take over the oil industry entirely... I mean, if folks wnat the government on the hook for the risks why not have it also be there for the profits??? B~ |
|
17 Jun 10 - 08:31 AM (#2929784) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Greg F. ...create a Department of Oil Spills, fund it with a couple hundred billion dollars a year... Ya mean like Baby Bush's Department of Hopeless Stupidity, err, I mean Homeland Security? Probably be about as effective. |
|
17 Jun 10 - 11:16 AM (#2929870) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: GUEST,TIA I've heard a lot of this "Obama should have done something right away" nonsense spewing from Faux and its followers. As a frequent contractor to the Federal government, I have some experience on which to base a quick thought experiment. Here it is: The federal government does not actually "do" much of anything. They hire contractors, and provide oversight. When the Corps of Engineers (for instance) is fixing a dam (for instance), they hire contractors to do the drilling and grouting, or whatever. This is largely because they do not have the necessary specialized equipment. So, Obama steps in and has the Fed fix the spill. They will hire contractors. Who would be the contractors? Who has the specialized equipment? Yup, you guessed it - BP! So, What Faux is really saying is: "let's pay BP to stop the leak instead of pushing them to do it on their own dime." But, The Fed gets its money from whom? Yup, you got it - YOU! So, Faux is really saying: "You citizens of the USA should be paying BP to stop the leak" Brilliant. Doesn't sound quite like that when Hannity and Limbaugh say it, does it? Some people really need to learn to **think** |
|
17 Jun 10 - 11:29 AM (#2929881) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: dick greenhaus Arkie- "No question about the public not wanting his energy saving program. The public did not want it when Jimmy Carter proposed cutting back on energy and searching for alternatives to petroleum in the 1970s. They would not want it now even if republicans who are determined to feed the fat cats at the expense of the country or petroleum lobbyists were to remain silent. Some of the public would not want it anyway" So what? Can you (or the "public" you refer to come up with an alternative plan? |
|
17 Jun 10 - 12:12 PM (#2929896) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Arkie Dick, as you know well or so I assume, that the American public is quite diverse. There are certainly those who welcome a movement toward alternative forms of energy. What I do not understand is why a great majority does not welcome such a move. But Carter's proposal did not find a welcoming audience. Was it because people did not want to make any sacrifices for the present and the future? Much like people today who cry cut federal spending but don't you dare cut any part that is coming to me. Reduce the federal deficit, but it had better not affect me in any fashion. We have a lot of folks in this country who allow pecker and limburger do their thinking for them. I guess they are conserving their brainwaves. Then we have those who prefer to count words instead of taking positive steps toward dealing with present and future problems. |
|
17 Jun 10 - 02:14 PM (#2929979) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Greg F. Some people really need to learn to **think** Don't nobody hold your breath- |
|
17 Jun 10 - 02:41 PM (#2930006) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Bobert You got it TIA... Faux wants it both ways... Less government and more government??? Wish they coud make up their minds 'cause this entire subject of more v. less is comin' at US like a freight train and folks ain't gonna be able to get away with talking out both sides of their mouths too much longer before even the dumbed down are gonna stop and say, "Hey, that don't make no sense..." B~ |
|
17 Jun 10 - 07:54 PM (#2930191) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: Riginslinger Oh, I thought this was about Alvin Greene. |
|
17 Jun 10 - 08:21 PM (#2930211) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: ichMael Ehrlich, Holdren...they're vipers. You are being sold suicidal ideation. Don't fall for it. |
|
17 Jun 10 - 08:24 PM (#2930215) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: ichMael Hmm. Wrong thread, but the point's still valid. There's a thread about the End of Man-kind running. Lots of "we deserve it" talk. Such BS. |
|
18 Jun 10 - 12:41 AM (#2930282) Subject: RE: BS: Obama's Green Speech From: dick greenhaus Whether or not it's a popular notion, and whether or not it will be an expensive decision, developing alternate energy sources---and I, for one, would emphatically include nuclear power, at least for the near future---is a better path to follow than perpetuating dependence on fossil fuels. Oil and coal are just too damn expensive, in terms of life and the environment---and in dollars, too. |