posted at 1:30 pm on November 2, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
In another clip from the same January 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in which Barack Obama promised to bankrupt anyone foolish enough to build coal-burning power plants, he also made an interesting admission about his entire energy plan. Obama told the editors that his policies would make energy prices “skyrocket” as the energy industry passed along the exorbitant costs of his cap-and-trade policy:
The problem is not technical, uh, and the problem is not mastery of the legislative intricacies of Washington. The problem is, uh, can you get the American people to say, “This is really important,” and force their representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake. Uh, and climate change is a great example.
You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad.
Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.
They — you — you can already see what the arguments will be during the general election. People will say, “Ah, Obama and Al Gore, these folks, they’re going to destroy the economy, this is going to cost us eight trillion dollars,” or whatever their number is. Um, if you can’t persuade the American people that yes, there is going to be some increase in electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term, because of combinations of more efficient energy usage, changing lightbulbs and more efficient appliance, but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy, the economy would benefit.
If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you — you, uh, can be Lyndon Johnson, you can be the master of Washington. You’re not going to get that done.
Energy prices skyrocketing will leave the economy in tatters, as we saw earlier this year. While no one doubts the need to start transitioning to better sources of energy, the manner in which that gets done means the difference of whether it gets done at all. A stagnant or receding economy does not produce scientific breakthroughs, especially when government both increases taxes and imposes steep cost burdens on energy. That cuts into both manufacturing and R&D, because as profits fall, fewer dollars go into research — which means that all of these wonderful developments would get delayed, or go unrealized altogether.
We need to plan for the transition better than what Obama proposes. We need to use our own reserves of oil, natural gas, coal, and shale to cushion the economy while we develop the alternatives and build the infrastructure to deliver it. That’s what John McCain proposed in his Lexington Project.
Price shocks on energy is the last thing this economy needs. It would be worse than the taxes Obama promises to impose on investment, and would have the same depressive effect. It’s an utter disaster.
ya know ...... he says ya know not as often as a young NBA player in a post game interview ..... but he says it to much to get a C in a speech class much less be a "great speaker"
but to the NBA players credit they are 18-30 something not 47, and not praised for their speaking, and speaking well in the NBA doesnt make you more effective.
Obama's umms, uhhs, stutters, and ya knows in his speeches wouldn't even net him a "C" in a speech class. The man sounds stupid when he is on live TV and gets asked a question, "Yea, umm, I, uhh, err, umm, umm, would like to state that, umm, I think..."
__________________
I don't own firearms. I just like the forum.
Obama's umms, uhhs, stutters, and ya knows in his speeches wouldn't even net him a "C" in a speech class. The man sounds stupid when he is on live TV and gets asked a question, "Yea, umm, I, uhh, err, umm, umm, would like to state that, umm, I think..."
I don't believe he's stupid or even a poor speaker. I believe he has a very hard time just plain answering a question. Wouldn't want anyone to actually know what you believe, ya' know?
__________________ http://firesaxby.com
------------------------------------------------------
XD 45 Compact
S&W 4" Model 15
1985 Bulgarian Makarov 9x18
Ruger Mk II 50th Anniversary Edition (the wife's)
Ruger K10/22RPF (stock for now)
I don't believe he's stupid or even a poor speaker. I believe he has a very hard time just plain answering a question. Wouldn't want anyone to actually know what you believe, ya' know?
I agree King. He wants to answer without answering. Just like he votes on bills without voting by casting a "present" vote. That way, you can't hold anything to him.
Mr. Obama, do you believe in gun control? Ans: Present
Mr. Obama, will you increase taxes? Ans: Present
I can see it now. President Obama! The Iranians just launched what may be a nuclear tipped warhead against Washington! It will arrive in 30 minutes! Should we launch in retaliation? Ans: um, um, ah, um, ah,.............Present! Oh........and have my jet fired up.
AZXD: Didn't mean to hijack your thread here with my previous reply to King.
The democrats want to add what is called a carbon tax to energy. The more pollutants/greenhouse gases released would require a higher tax. Energy prices would go up.
I believe the democrats really want energy/gas prices to go up and for everyone to move back into the urban centers. You can't afford gasoline, move back to the dying cities. This will make the cities great to them again. They will have your taxes to help with their failed policies. Crime in the cities? Don't worry about it. You won't have a gun and the police will take care of that. Once the population is living in the urban centers again, they will turn to the politicians for handouts and will be more dependent on government. Look at all the major urban centers. Democratic strongholds. All of them with their hands out. It is the independent people living in the heartland that doesn't need politicians to take care of them. They want to put a stop to that. Higher gasoline taxes to them is one way to do it.
AZXD: Didn't mean to hijack your thread here with my previous reply to King.
The democrats want to add what is called a carbon tax to energy. The more pollutants/greenhouse gases released would require a higher tax. Energy prices would go up.
I believe the democrats really want energy/gas prices to go up and for everyone to move back into the urban centers. You can't afford gasoline, move back to the dying cities. This will make the cities great to them again. They will have your taxes to help with their failed policies. Crime in the cities? Don't worry about it. You won't have a gun and the police will take care of that. Once the population is living in the urban centers again, they will turn to the politicians for handouts and will be more dependent on government. Look at all the major urban centers. Democratic strongholds. All of them with their hands out. It is the independent people living in the heartland that doesn't need politicians to take care of them. They want to put a stop to that. Higher gasoline taxes to them is one way to do it.
No, an Obama interview with the SFO Chronicle. Trouble with reading or selective preception/retention on your part?
This is why I don't bother providing you with info anymore. You find a reason to summarily dismiss it if it doesn't fit your insanely liberal biases.
__________________
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Linear Mode
