Windpower

Moderator: The Merrimack Volunteer Moderators

Re: Windpower

Postby RD » Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:43 am

Michael Pelletier wrote:When leftists talk about "investment in alternative energy," remember that they're talking about investing YOUR money, against your will, in THEIR companies. Think about that the next time you fill up your gas tank.

I'd much prefer that infinitely wiser investment to investing MY money, agains my will, in an invasion and occupation of Iraq. And I DO think about that every time I fill up my gas tank.
"If you think teachers are your enemy, you should probably reassess who you think your friends are." - Chris Larson
RD
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby Michael Thompson » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:05 am

TCF wrote:As for there being alternatives, there are many feasible solutions that would assist in the consumption of oil and the polution of the air.

What are these feasable alternitives you mention? There are none, that are feasable at this time.
As far as planning to cut my energy consumption, Why would I want to do that? There is plenty of energy, only those who refuse to drill for it.

But I assume that you being so energy conscious that you unplug you pc everynight, phone charger tv, Inflate your tires everyday. Sorry but the absurdity of the liberal mindset is a mental disorder. Did you give up the SUV yet? If so why?
You libs want us all living back in the 1800's when there is absolutly no reason to go backwards. And of course I am sure you belive in the biggest hoax of all, global warming. Another BS scheme to pick your pockets and go green.


Actually I did get rid of my SUV this year. Here are the reasons, financial (payment and gas cost), mpg, less consumption of oil, and less air polution.

You got me on the unplugging of my PC, however I do turn it off now which I didn't before. I also lowered the temp of my home during the winter by 4 degrees.

As for there being plenty of energy, I would beg to differ. The cost of oil has increased due to the demand increase, showing there isn't enough energy.

You are stating there is enough oil if we drill, different then energy.

I disagree with your on the feasible alternatives, I will leave it at that since I have given examples and you don't agree.

I disagree with you on Global Warming also, so we must agree to disagree.

I don't want to bring you back to the 1800's and I am sure that someone here that usually doesn't agree with me would even back that up.

You obviously see that using the word lib is an insult or you wouldn't use it as a deflection to a discussion/debate. Clearly in your above statement it is directed at me since you are trashing my post.

It is clear that your views will not change and you feel that anyone that disagrees with you is mentally ill. Have a good day TCF, look into drilling in your yard. Maybe you will hit black gold!
"I'm a great believer in luck and I find the harder I work, the more I have of it." Thomas Jefferson
Michael Thompson
 
Posts: 1341
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 8:25 pm
Location: Merrimack

Re: Windpower

Postby andysinnh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:16 am

So I'll chime in here, knowing that I'll get labelled a mentally disabled liberal.... :lol:

I don't care if oil is $50 a barrel or $200 a barrel - I don't have a bunch of disposable income kicking around to be wasting energy and paying more than I need to. When an appliance wears out or breaks, I try to buy something that'll cost me less to run each year. When our furnace needed replacing, I opted for something more efficient so I wouldn't use more natural gas so I'd have a lower operating cost. When my kids started going to college (where a big chunk of my and their "nondisposable" income started going), we began downsizing our vehicles since we didn't need the size nor "hauling horsepower" that we did before. Did I go out and buy a Prius? Nope, because for me it was too small and didn't provide the capabilities I needed. But did I dump the SUV? yea - because I didn't need it any more. I turn off lights in rooms that are empty. I don't run the A/C when we don't need it. Why? Because it reduces my energy costs so I can funnel more money to college and other things that are important.

TCF - if you have enough disposable income that you want to leave your blender or toaster running 24x7, just because you can, have at it. I'm wondering if you're like many of the people I see around that drive their Hummers or Expeditions or Navigators - not because they need them, but because it's their right to own them - who then want to drill-drill-drill to help reduce their expense at the pumps, to support their right to drive what they want. I used to own a Chevy Tahoe and a full-sized conversion van - because I "needed" the space in side for kids and hauling a trailer around. But after a while, even with gas at the $2 per gallon range, it was killing my budget to run them, so we decided to modify our requirements. Did I do it to help make the US require less oil? Nope - I was selfish enough to think I ought to be paying less for energy in my overall budget. If you make a different choice, that's your business. But to push on ME the requirement that we drill more to help save YOU money - then that's something I'm not sure I support....
Andy Schneider
andysinnh
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Woodward Rd

Re: Windpower

Postby platypusman » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:26 am

So I'll chime in here, knowing that I'll get labelled a mentally disabled liberal....

I don't care if oil is $50 a barrel or $200 a barrel - I don't have a bunch of disposable income kicking around to be wasting energy and paying more than I need to. When an appliance wears out or breaks, I try to buy something that'll cost me less to run each year. When our furnace needed replacing, I opted for something more efficient so I wouldn't use more natural gas so I'd have a lower operating cost. When my kids started going to college (where a big chunk of my and their "nondisposable" income started going), we began downsizing our vehicles since we didn't need the size nor "hauling horsepower" that we did before. Did I go out and buy a Prius? Nope, because for me it was too small and didn't provide the capabilities I needed. But did I dump the SUV? yea - because I didn't need it any more. I turn off lights in rooms that are empty. I don't run the A/C when we don't need it. Why? Because it reduces my energy costs so I can funnel more money to college and other things that are important.


Andy I always thought of you as a rich guy with lots of disposable income! Anyway what you are saying is reasonable and I doubt you would see opposition. However, I believe you are completely wrong about the need to increase supplies of oil. If one eliminates the politics from the energy debate you will see that oil and other carbon-based fuels will continue to be a requirement for sometime. The generation technologies and distribution systems for alternative sources are just not in place to substitute for oil and natural gas. Given this fact, please show me otherwise, we need to increase supplies in the US and offshore drilling will certainly help.
User avatar
platypusman
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:27 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby RD » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:55 am

platypusman wrote:The generation technologies and distribution systems for alternative sources are just not in place to substitute for oil and natural gas. Given this fact, please show me otherwise, we need to increase supplies in the US and offshore drilling will certainly help.

That's true, but that's only one solution. There is a far better solution, and that is to put in place the technologies and distribution systems for alternative energy sources. That would be progress instead of just continuing with the status quo.
"If you think teachers are your enemy, you should probably reassess who you think your friends are." - Chris Larson
RD
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby andysinnh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:10 am

platypusman wrote:Andy I always thought of you as a rich guy with lots of disposable income! Anyway what you are saying is reasonable and I doubt you would see opposition. However, I believe you are completely wrong about the need to increase supplies of oil. If one eliminates the politics from the energy debate you will see that oil and other carbon-based fuels will continue to be a requirement for sometime. The generation technologies and distribution systems for alternative sources are just not in place to substitute for oil and natural gas. Given this fact, please show me otherwise, we need to increase supplies in the US and offshore drilling will certainly help.

Rich guy with disposable cash, eh? You obviously haven't been paying attention in that the second income in my household is from a public school teacher. Yep, rich would describe me. But if your comment was tongue-in-cheek, then I guess I'd agree. Otherwise... :?

My issue isn't doing some additional drilling - but rather to the extent and "checks-and-balances" involved. Remember that poll I put up a few weeks back? You and others put in "unrestricted drilling" - and that's where I have an issue. The oil companies and the government, under restraint and advice of the National Geological Survey, need to decide just where leases can safely be granted, and in a fashion that doesn't turn our seascape into a visual collage similar to what you show as a negative for wind farms. IMHO, offshore oil drilling, if not done with restraint and forethought, can be more dangerous than any other type of energy gathering both onshore and offshore. Limited. Controlled. Done with Forethought. I could buy into a plan like that. But, like it or not, government involvement and control is needed - otherwise Biff's vision of the alternat 1985 will come true.
Andy Schneider
andysinnh
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Woodward Rd

Re: Windpower

Postby platypusman » Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:34 pm

Andy just joking.....


Ok, I can accept reaonable oversight for the drilling projects.
User avatar
platypusman
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:27 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby andysinnh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:49 pm

platypusman wrote:Andy just joking.....

With tuition bills coming in, even with the kids handling their fair share and doing very well while in school, one certainly doesn't feel "rich" this time of year. :(
Andy Schneider
andysinnh
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Woodward Rd

Re: Windpower

Postby platypusman » Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:53 pm

Andy from the sound of it, you have done a fine job! You should be proud of your 'handiwork'.
User avatar
platypusman
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:27 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby TCF » Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:37 pm

andyinnh - TCF - if you have enough disposable income that you want to leave your blender or toaster running 24x7, just because you can, have at it. I'm wondering if you're like many of the people I see around that drive their Hummers or Expeditions or Navigators - not because they need them, but because it's their right to own them - who then want to drill-drill-drill to help reduce their expense at the pumps, to support their right to drive what they want. I used to own a Chevy Tahoe and a full-sized conversion van - because I "needed" the space in side for kids and hauling a trailer around. But after a while, even with gas at the $2 per gallon range, it was killing my budget to run them, so we decided to modify our requirements. Did I do it to help make the US require less oil? Nope - I was selfish enough to think I ought to be paying less for energy in my overall budget. If you make a different choice, that's your business. But to push on ME the requirement that we drill more to help save YOU money - then that's something I'm not sure I support....

No I don't own a hummer, but it has nothing to do with need. If I wanted one and had the cash to buy one just for fun, that should be my option. And has nothing to do with me saving money. It has to do with the way Americans live. If I choose to blow my money on hummers boats planes, who is anyone to tell me I can't when there is enough oil to last long after our grand kids grandkids are born. Oil is the engine of this country. It has made America what it is today. We have the technology to get it, safely without hurting the environment for all you tree huggers. Oil is not evil, but because of libs in office we have the Chinese drilling off the gulf coast but we can't simply unbelievable this mindset. I have no problem with you downsizing because of your budget, we all do and have. But no one should tell anyone what they can't and can't drive or buy because of resources readily available, only beurocrats getting in the way. It is un American.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
TCF
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby RD » Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:01 pm

TCF wrote:because of libs in office we have the Chinese drilling off the gulf coast but we can't simply unbelievable this mindset.

Huh???
"If you think teachers are your enemy, you should probably reassess who you think your friends are." - Chris Larson
RD
 
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 3:49 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby andysinnh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:13 pm

TCF wrote:No I don't own a hummer, but it has nothing to do with need. If I wanted one and had the cash to buy one just for fun, that should be my option. And has nothing to do with me saving money. It has to do with the way Americans live. If I choose to blow my money on hummers boats planes, who is anyone to tell me I can't when there is enough oil to last long after our grand kids grandkids are born. Oil is the engine of this country. It has made America what it is today. We have the technology to get it, safely without hurting the environment for all you tree huggers. Oil is not evil, but because of libs in office we have the Chinese drilling off the gulf coast but we can't simply unbelievable this mindset. I have no problem with you downsizing because of your budget, we all do and have. But no one should tell anyone what they can't and can't drive or buy because of resources readily available, only beurocrats getting in the way. It is un American.

Thanks for clarifying your position on living the american dream. Live to your desires, within whatever your means may be, and expect that a commodity that you require for that lifestyle be in plentiful demand at an attractive price. Problem is, to quote platy, supply and demand from the free, open market may come to bite you on that one, because a growing number of Americans are looking to balance their desires with something that may not be coming from a bottomless pit. You claim that "we have the technology to get it, safely without hurting the environment" - well that may or may not be true, and depending on WHERE you want to drill for that oil, the technology may not be there to protect the environment as you imply. And part of your conservative mantra is to take anyone who disagrees and labels them as a "tree-hugger" - oh, joy, now I have a label. If you were paying attention, in a reply to Platy, I stated controlled and regulated locations for drilling, and even Platy said that was a prudent stance. You appear thus far to be of the mindset that any location is fair game for drilling - and that's not something I could even begin to compromise with. We've spent so much energy in this country over the past few months saying to throw caution to the wind and drill for self-sufficency, that the meter of sanity is heading in a dangerous, "slippery slope" direction. You, TCF, are one of those who say that windfall profit taxes are the same slippery slope - start with oil today, what does it go to tomorrow? - and I contend your oil drilling mantra is the same slippery slope - although I'm sure you don't see it that way. The american way has been about freedoms and the right to do what you like - but at the same time, sacraficing during times of need and being realistic about the scope of what's available, are also the "american way". Back in WWII, when the US had gas rationing in support of the war - would you have supported that effort, or said "drill now, drill everywhere"? What if rationing happened due to an expansion of the mideast strife? What would your position be as an American?
Andy Schneider
andysinnh
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Woodward Rd

Re: Windpower

Postby TCF » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:05 pm

andysinnh - Thanks for clarifying your position on living the american dream. Live to your desires, within whatever your means may be, and expect that a commodity that you require for that lifestyle be in plentiful demand at an attractive price.

It is a commodity that we all require, you are fooling yourself if you think we could survive without oil. Like I said, I have no problem looking at other alternatives which we are already doing for decades. And for now it is decades in the future before their is a viable solution. And yes I do expect it to be in plentiful demand and not have the Pelozi's of the world shutting off the lights when a vote should be taken. There is no shortage of oil, no scare tactics that it is going to destroy the environment. Of course it would be expected to be drilled for as it now is safe and environmentally friendly. We have been doing it for years. Anwar, geez a small dot of wasteland for all intense and purposes, but nope can't drill there. Continue to follow the left wing wackos and go back into the dark ages, thats what you will get with The CHOSEN ONE. A very very very small list of oil based products. How many can you live without.


Wound and Scar Relief Dry Nose Relief Eczema and Itch Relief Menstrual Cramp Relief Adhesives Automotive Candles and Waxes Cement and Concrete Coatings Hot Stamp and Foil coatings Wood Stains Fluorescent Dyes Leak Detection Food and Cosmetics Forensics Greases - Lubricants and Oil based products Inks Ink Jet Printing Ink Sublimation and Transfer Printing Writing and Marker Ink Leather Drum Dyeing Finishing Mulch Non Wovens Optical Brighteners Detergents Plastics Paper and Pulp Coatings for Pulp and Paper Padding Plastics and Polymers Dyes for Plastics and Polymers Fluorescents for Plastics and Polymers Pigments for Plastics and Polymers Special Effects for Plastics and Polymers Soaps and Detergents Make up Phones Air conditioners, ammonia, anti-histamines, antiseptics, artificial turf, asphalt, aspirin, balloons, bandages, boats, bottles, bras, bubble gum, butane, cameras, candles, car batteries, car bodies, carpet, cassette tapes, caulking, CDs, chewing gum, cold, combs/brushes, computers, contacts, cortisone, crayons, cream, denture adhesives, deodorant, detergents, dice, dishwashing liquid, dresses, dryers, electric blankets, electrician’s tape, fertilisers, fishing lures, fishing rods, floor wax, footballs, glues, glycerin, golf balls, guitar strings, hair, hair colouring, hair curlers, hearing aids, heart valves, heating oil, house paint, ice chests, ink, insect repellent, insulation, jet fuel, life jackets, linoleum, lip balm, lipstick, loudspeakers, medicines, mops, motor oil, motorcycle helmets, movie film, nail polish, oil filters, paddles, paint brushes, paints, parachutes, paraffin, pens, perfumes, petroleum jelly, plastic chairs, plastic cups, plastic forks, plastic wrap, plastics, plywood adhesives, refrigerators, roller-skate wheels, roofing paper, rubber bands, rubber boots, rubber cement, rubbish bags, running shoes, saccharine, seals, shirts (non-cotton), shoe polish, shoes, shower curtains, solvents, solvents, spectacles, stereos, sweaters, table tennis balls, tape recorders, telephones, tennis rackets, thermos, tights, toilet seats, toners, toothpaste, transparencies, transparent tape, TV cabinets, typewriter/computer ribbons, tyres, umbrellas, upholstery, vaporisers, vitamin capsules, volleyballs, water pipes, water skis, wax, wax paper to name a very few. So I'll see ya naked in a cave soon, eh?
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
TCF
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Windpower

Postby andysinnh » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:15 pm

TCF - not sure who you are, my friend, but your logic is very strange. I'm not sure if you're reading every other word I say - but I'm not saying we can't live without oil. But what I am saying is that your fervor for drilling anywhere, anytime, regardless of the risks, is frankly a real issue towards the long-term existence of America. Oil in and of itself, while important, isn't what makes this country. Doing it in a limited, controlled fashion, so we can continue to use your oh-so-elloquent list of petrolium-based products is what I'd like to see. But, alas, since you'll be reading every-other-word I say, you'll likely see what you want to see. If, as Jeannine says you own land in Merrimack, can we assume that you'd allow drilling on your land to see if there's any oil underneath it? Who knows - maybe those jack-hammers on the demolition of the Merrimack Village dam might hit some oil - oh, wait, maybe that's the underground tanks at AL Prime. :?
Andy Schneider
andysinnh
 
Posts: 2361
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:04 am
Location: Woodward Rd

Re: Windpower

Postby TCF » Fri Aug 15, 2008 10:22 pm

From the airwaves. Exxon and the anti christ to the lefties

TILLERSON: Everything we do, the numbers are very large. I saw someone [Barack Obama] characterize our profits the other day in terms of "$1,400 in profit per second." Well, they also need to understand we paid $4,000 a second in taxes, and we spent $15,000 a second in cost. We spend $1 billion a day just running our business. So this is a business where large numbers are just characteristic of it.

GIBSON: When profits are so high, why is spending on exploration so low?

TILLERSON: Well, we're spending at record levels. Through the first half of this year, we have spent $12.5 billion. That's a record level of capital and exploration expenditures for us.

RUSH: Did you hear that question that Charlie Gibson asked? "When profits are so high, why is spending on exploration so low?" Uh, Charlie? Would you tell me where in the name of Sam Hill they are allowed to explore in this country? They are exploring everywhere but here! You know, folks, there is so much absurdity out there. It's like, have you seen this story on what they have found in the Sahara Desert? Listen to this. The Sahara Desert, it's a desert. For those of you in Rio Linda, it means it's miles and miles and miles of dry, parched sand. You will die there in two days, unless you run into an oasis. "A tiny woman and two children were laid to rest on a bed of flowers 5,000 years ago in what is now the barren Sahara Desert.

"The slender arms of the youngsters were still extended to the woman in perpetual embrace when researchers discovered their skeletons in a remarkable cemetery that is providing clues to two civilizations who lived there, a thousand years apart, when the region was moist and green. Paul Sereno of the University of Chicago and colleagues were searching for the remains of dinosaurs in the African country of Niger when they came across the startling find, detailed at a news conference Thursday at the National Geographic Society. 'Part of discovery is finding things that you least expect,' he said. 'When you come across something like that in the middle of the desert it sends a tingle down your spine.' Some 200 graves of humans were found during fieldwork... 'Everywhere you turned, there were bones belonging to animals that don't live in the desert,' said Sereno.

"'I realized we were in the green Sahara.'" Five thousand years ago. Now, it almost sounds foolish to me to have to ask the question, but if the Sahara Desert was once fertile, green, and lush -- people and animals lived and thrived there, which means plenty of food was also available there -- and 5,000 years later it's now a barren desert, and there were no automobiles, there were no lightbulbs, there were no fossil fuels, there were no automobiles, there was nothing! There was no industrialization. There were no coal-fired power plants. There was zilch, zero, in terms of "carbon footprint." So somebody explain to me how the hell a lush, dense, green area 5,000 years ago becomes a barren desert? Now, it's patently obvious that the climate of this planet goes at its own pace, and its own time.


It does what it wants to do when it wants to do it and we have diddly-squat to do about it, and these poor saps that lived in that region had no more ability to stop the warming back then that was going to turn the place into a desert than we have the ability to stop it now because we're not causing it. We cannot! Stories like this just make the whole global warming story patently absurd! Just absurd. It makes me wonder why you have to spend any time on it all discussing it. The same thing here with this Russian and other situations, the oil situation. I have said the most expensive commodity in this country is ignorance, and it's on display, and it's costing us. It's going to cost us some of our freedom if it doesn't stop. It's going to cost us lots of money. So here's poor old Rex Tillerson -- and it was Obama, by the way, that said "$1,400 a second in profits."

But $15,000 a second in costs, $4,000 a second in taxes, While Pelosi and other irresponsible, shameful members of her party demonize people like Rex Tillerson and the oil companies, what is the federal government doing? They are the biggest thief on this planet. They're the ones without doing diddly-squat get $4,000 a second in taxes off of the hard work of Rex Tillerson and his boys and ExxonMobil and all the other oil companies combined. The government gets the biggest damn take of everybody's output and labor in this country! They do. And those people that get elected and run the place then have to turn around and tar and feather the producers and the movers and the shakers and the people that make this country work, demonize them as thieves and criminals when the thieves are in Washington, DC. And they can never get enough.

They're going to get close to $3 trillion produced by you and me and Rex Tillerson and his boys, and it's not enough. They're going to come back for even more. The whole point of this stupid, worthless, totally fraudulent hoax, global warming is about getting more money and denying you freedom. And making you feel guilty so that you'll pay it, gladly. It's so obvious. And yet all they've gotta do is say, "Big Oil! Big Oil!" Obama actually said -- this is how stupid he is; there's not another word for this -- "Every time you fill your tank, Big Oil fills its coffers." Well, hell, yes! You're buying their product, for crying out loud! Where's it going to go?

You fill your tank with gasoline, who's going to get the money? I would think. "Every time you fill your tank, Big Oil fills its coffers." Every time you fill your stomach, Big Food fills its coffers! Every time you buy a surfboard for your vacation in Hawaii, Big Surfboard fills its coffers! How stupid is this? I really worry about the state of my IQ if I have to keep trying to teach and train people about this stuff, because I'm going to lose patience with it. There's more Rex Tillerson. Charlie Gibson said, "Former senators had the temerity to say the other day Americans are whining. Are they whining? Or do you really -- can you, from where you are, feel their pain?"

TILLERSON: No, I don't think it's whining, Charlie, because I don't think there's any question that if these prices -- $3.50, $4 a gallon for gasoline -- and the follow-through effects on the cost of electricity, that this is causing a lot of problems for a lot of Americans, again, who their budgets just are very difficult for them to accommodate this. And they don't have other options. Much of the world, certainly here in Texas where you're visiting, we do not have large mass transportation systems. And so people don't have a lot of other options than to get in their car and have to drive to get about their daily requirements.

RUSH: So then Charlie Gibson says, "[C]ome back to Sen. Obama. He's calling for a windfall profits tax, $65 billion, five years. Oil companies, in his plan, pay it. And when the public sees the kind of profits that the oil companies are making, and ExxonMobil in particular, and when they see the size of the stock buybacks, isn't it fair that they wonder why not?"

TILLERSON: Well, I guess the question is what's that going to solve? ... Nowhere in a windfall profits tax do I see anything that addresses the problem. I understand that may be popular with some people because of how they view our current-day profitability. ... But, again, Charlie, I think the question is are we going to have a serious debate about solving the long-term energy problem, or are we just going to look for short-term solutions again to make everybody feel better?

RUSH: That's what we're going to have as long as the Democrats and the Drive-By Media control the debate. That's exactly what it's going to be: Solutions that solve nothing. In fact, no solutions, just a bunch of stupid rhetoric appealing to the lowest common denominator of common sense and intelligence in this country. "Yeah, make Big Oil suffer! Make 'em suffer!" Why doesn't anybody ever say, "Make government suffer"? Why? How come it is that the one element that always botches what it attempts...? It tries to fix poverty? It makes it worse. It tries to fix racism, discrimination; it busts up the black family and destroys it. It tries to run the Post Office, and it's a billion dollars in debt. Everything it does! People say, "Let's let the government fix health care," you name it. Yet whatever it is that they do, they screw up, and people still are willing to turn to them to fix what they broke in the first place.

I intellectually understand it. Fifty years of this kind of class envy rhetoric from FDR on -- maybe 60 years by now, close to it -- all this the government is benevolent, the government's here to help you and so forth. By the way, I don't have any animosity. I don't hate the institution of government. It's just way too big. It's way out of hand. It's being run by too many charlatans and phony plastic banana, good-time rock 'n' roller leftists who have a view of government that's far different than most of us who want it limited, out of the way. There certain responsibilities that it compels at and does very well and get out of our way. Leave us alone. The other side wants this government involved in every step of your life they can 'cause they don't trust you to live your life right without them.

Some people have just bought hook, line, and sinker into the class envy argument, and they'll tell you they know that a tax increase on the rich isn't going to help 'em, but it's going to make 'em feel better. "Yeah, find out what those people feel like when they suffer!" Well, the point is, you raise taxes on the people that hire people and fewer people are going to get hired. So the intended beneficiary (which is nuts to say anyway) of tax increases on the rich are the very people that get hurt by losing their jobs. And I'll tell you what, a windfall profits tax, we've done it. Jimmy Carter did it. All that happened was the supply dropped because Big Oil stopped doing business in America and their profits were down, so there were fewer profits to pay windfall tax on in the first place! A windfall profits tax does not punish Big Oil; it punishes end users.


BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I guess this is one of these days I just feel like I need to get things off my chest. I sometimes get just so frustrated with the stupidity of the things I talk about. Not the stupidity of the things I say, because I don't say stupid things. The stupidity of having to talk about some of these things like oil companies as a villain, like global warming as something that's actually happening. It's frightening. Last night I was out to dinner, and just to show you the power of the Drive-By Media, the subject of the automobile companies came up, and one of my dinner partners started ripping into General Motors.

He said, "Yeah, well, look at what's happening to General Motors. Toyota is running rings around them. General Motors, they deserve what's happening. They haven't built cars anybody wants."

I said, "What are you talking about? What do you mean they don't build cars that people want? Who's telling you this, the Drive-By Media?"

"Yeah! They're not making enough fuel-efficient cars, and they're just selling these big SUVs and Hummers."

That's not true. It simply isn't true. But all this anti-corporate mentality in this country aimed at American corporations... You know, I'm just proud to be an American. I love the fact that God made me an American, and I don't understand anybody who doesn't appreciate it. I have a tough time -- I don't mean blanket approval, blind patriotism, but I don't understand the people who want to criticize this country and the people who have made it great enemies. We seem to be on this big anti-capitalist push right now, and it's being led by absolute idiots, people with no brains who have sponged up a bunch of drivel and bilge from America's leftists, because their lives are meaningless. They don't amount to anything in their own minds, sitting there trying to give themselves some reason to say their lives count, and so they buy into global warming. They buy into the fact that Big Oil is rotten. They buy into the fact have General Motors is rotten. General Motors, folks, has more models that get 30-miles-to-the-gallon or better on the highway than any other manufacturer. They do. They make all kinds of cars. Their fleet mileage standards are fine. I just get as frustrated as I can be, because all this criticism is mindless. It's like the criticism we got earlier today from the guy from LA who didn't want to sound like a commie lib, but it took him three sentences to pull it off, blaming us for Russia going into Georgia, blaming us for triggering the whole thing, blaming us because Blackwater might have been there training Georgian soldiers, as though everything that we do is evil.


END TRANSCRIPT
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
TCF
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:57 pm

PreviousNext

Return to National Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron