It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

why don't the Democrats jump ship and initilize a Stronger Alternative Energy Bill?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Everyone knows the Republicans are in bed with Big Oil, why don't the Democrats jump ship and initilize a Stronger Alternative Energy Bill?


I'm a Republican and I find it disgusting how our party panders to Big Oil, my question is why won't the Democrats take this as an opportunity to get some support and traction within their base to initiate a Much Bolder Energy Bill of their own.

This could be a great united message the Democrats could all get behind what are they waiting for? Does Hilary have to give the rest of them approval or is Big Oil too big? This would be a great national agenda for the party would it not?


[edit on 1-5-2006 by Low Orbit]

MOD EDIT: Long title fix.

[edit on 5/1/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]




posted on May, 1 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   

posted by Low Orbit: “Everyone knows the Republicans are in bed with Big Oil, why don't the Democrats jump ship and initialize a Stronger Alternative Energy Bill? [Edited by Don W]


Alternative Energy is very weak. It is very far away, at best. And IMO, it will prove a large disappointment to those who put too much trust or hope in this.


I'm a Republican and I find it disgusting how our party panders to Big Oil, my question is why won't the Democrats take this as an opportunity to get some support and traction within their base to initiate a Much Bolder Energy Bill of their own.


I would like to see anything that would get the Democrats off dead center. Harry Truman beat Tom Dewey in 1948 but the Republicans reversed that and beat the Democrats in 2004. When one party tried to outdo the other party’s traditional stance on issues.


This could be a great united message the Democrats could all get behind what are they waiting for? Does Hilary have to give the rest of them approval or is Big Oil too big? This would be a great national agenda for the party would it not?


There are many other issues to be dealt with. The Gang of Four is Bumfuzzled in Iraq. Immigration. The Iran-India-North Korea quagmire. Health care now at 18% of GDP, driving the country to bankruptcy. Lack of funding for Education at all levels. And etc. 2006 will not be a single issue election.


The 2006 election can be lost on one issue but it cannot be won on a single issue. Reference 1992.

(America’s Gang of 4 - Geo W, VP Cheney, the Oberfuhrer and Condo Rice.)

[edit on 5/1/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I agree with you on the fact that 2006 will not be won on a single issue alone, it could be argued that there has Never been such an election in history.

But the alternative sources are too weak? Come on.

To me that sounds like a defeatist who happens to be indifferent.

We have many promising forms of alternative energies, Solar panels, windmills, underwater mills, wave farms, alternative fuels etc as sources of energy and that list will only grow if we pursue it.

Sure if we fully invested into the cause today we would not be able to completely solve our dependance on foreign oil tomorrow, however by investing money into this and pusuing these types of energies reminds Big Oil that we will not take their price gouging forever.

Before the Airplane was built how many people believed it was feasible?


[edit on 1-5-2006 by Low Orbit]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   
All those alternative sources you cite are out of reach for many, if not most, of the middle class. For those of us who can barely afford gasoline these days, solar panels and windmills just ain't gonna happen.

Until an alternative is found that is affordable to all, these other energy sources will not replace fossil fuels.

Of course, I've been wrong before



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:17 PM
link   
We Get To Choose November 7


posted by Low Orbit: “I agree with you on the fact that 2006 will not be won on a single issue. But the alternative sources are too weak? Come on. We have many promising forms of alternative energies, Solar panels, windmills, underwater mills, wave farms, alternative fuels etc as sources of energy and that list will only grow if we pursue it. By investing money into this and pursuing these types of energies reminds Big Oil that we will not take their price gouging forever. Before the Airplane was built how many people believed it was feasible? [Edited by Don W]


We could deal with price gouging more directly if we ever wanted to stop them. We do not have to allow a few hundred speculators set our prices and jerk us around on their whim. That’s a choice we make. Or at least we have waived our rights to others to make for us.

High gas prices are as much our fault for neglect as opportunity and greed motivates others. But, reduced consumption is the only way we are ever going to get ourselves off the addiction for cheap petroleum.

The CAFÉ should be 50 mpg. By 2015, and sufficient fines or guzzler taxes for not meeting the goal it would be impractical for any company not to make the goal. But regardless which way we go - throw billions at some pie in the sky like ADM - or reduce our consumption, it will take leadership to move it along.


[edit on 5/2/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
...We have many promising forms of alternative energies, Solar panels, windmills, underwater mills, wave farms, alternative fuels etc as sources of energy and that list will only grow if we pursue it.

Sure if we fully invested into the cause today we would not be able to completely solve our dependance on foreign oil tomorrow, however by investing money into this and pusuing these types of energies reminds Big Oil that we will not take their price gouging forever.

Before the Airplane was built how many people believed it was feasible?
[edit on 1-5-2006 by Low Orbit]


Low Orbit, here is an interesting link www.apolloalliance.org...
The push for the Democratic Party will have to come from what voters want and are willing to do. The GOP will never do something like in the link. I believe the Democratic Party, as evidenced in past energy policies and current proposals, will take us further away from foreign oil than the Republicans. They would invest in alternatives.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Don you are right about consumption that is half the problem, 2015 is a bold date, I like it! Please remember to include a caveat for classic musle cars.

Dont Tread, you are right to for the lower and middle class solar and wind/water power is too affordable for the masses. This is exactly why we need the government to come in and create some National Building Projects that would do for Energy today what the Hoover Dam did to it in the 1930's.

We need a true political leader in either house from either party to propose something of this magnitude to congress.

Great Problems should be met head on with Greater Solutions.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   
is there anyone that cares to comment? Have polls not come out for the democrats and this is why the forum is silent?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Low Orbit
Everyone knows the Republicans are in bed with Big Oil, why don't the Democrats jump ship and initilize a Stronger Alternative Energy Bill?

Because they're in bed with big oil.



why won't the Democrats take this as an opportunity to get some support and traction within their base to initiate a Much Bolder Energy Bill of their own.

Because it won't win them votes.

Look at it this way. The price of oil is dependant upon two basic things, the supply, and the amount of demand. Supply is bascially low, lower than in the past, and demand is very much up, in part because of india and china, but also because of a big increase in consumption in the US.

What is responsible for that increase in consumption? Industry? No, its the public. The public is purchasing and driving vehicles that are big, ineffective, wasteful fuel guzzlers, and in record numbers.

And yet, they are practically up in arms about gas prices. Why is that?

Because the american public is a bunch of idiots. Thats why the democrats won't be benefited by having a 'smart' energy policy. Because the people are stupid.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 09:20 PM
link   
they could promote the largest Public Building Project since the Great Depression in an attempt to globally promote Alternative Energy.

Wouldn't something of that magnitude get you a few votes?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Building what?

The infrastructure to distribute the alternative energy? But the alternative energy doesn't exist yet, and there is no market for it.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   
The nice thing about a Grand Scale Public Building Project is that you create your own market.

They could construct massive windmill and solar farms, wave farms, underwater mill/turbine farms,build new dams, algae farms, and lay the foundation for E85 to replace gasoline by 2020.

Those are only a few ideas, I'm sure there are others if anyone wants to chime in.

This could be a true American Industry, owned by Americans, run by Americans. Sure there will be some speed bumps along the way, but what some people call speed bumps I call jumps. That's half the fun!

I think it deserves a bit more consideration than you are putting into it.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join