Franken's just an old lump of coal

[zeitgeist]

Would ya look at this, from a diamond in the rough to a lump of coal.  How sharper than a serpent's tooth is a primitive's love for his Congress Ctitter.
  
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8752697

beachmom  (1000+ posts)      Fri Nov-13-09 02:26 PM
Original message
14 Senators demand climate bill go easy on coal. You'll be very surprised by some of the names:
 Fourteen Senators have sent a letter to the leadership demanding that coal be given a break. As Brad Johnson states:

http://www.grist.org/article/2009-11-12-fourteen-democr... /


Thursday, 14 Democratic senators affirmed their allegiance to the profits of polluting industry at the expense of the health and jobs of their constituents. In a letter to Senate leaders, a bloc of senators with powerful coal interests in their states called for “fair emissions allowances in climate change legislation.” Their definition of “fair,” unfortunately, turns out to be full taxpayer subsidies for global warming polluters.


Now while some of the names aren't a surprise, there are several liberals who signed this letter. It really is sad that I have to condemn Al Franken and Russ Feingold among others for lacking the vision of understanding how global climate change will affect their states. Here is the letter:
 

This is worse than no pony, no Santa, no Easter Bunny. !111! Oh no's not Franken!!!

NickB79 (1000+ posts)      Fri Nov-13-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gaaa, more embarrassment for MN
 WTF, Franken and Klobuchar? They've been solidly left, and now they go sucking Big Coal's ####.

What is the word for giving human characteristisc to inanimate objects? Anthropomorphism or should that just be liberal (for the spelling challenged)?

 

karynnj  (1000+ posts)        Fri Nov-13-09 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. This is an amazingly bad idea that would completely make cap and trade useless
 The whole point is to place a cost on carbon.

I understand that Senators are sometimes parochial, but here facing an environmental disaster that I assume they all believe in, they are worried about dollars. I hope Senator Kerry gets them to understand that this is not the time for that.

Help us John Kerry !111! Help us John Kerry.  !111!

and-justice-for-all  (1000+ posts)        Fri Nov-13-09 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
23. Franken?? AL FRANKEN???!!! nt
  
 Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

boppers (1000+ posts)      Fri Nov-13-09 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
40. How many of them would trade coal for nuke?
 For solar?
For wind?

How many union miners are they willing to put out of work?

Coal is very deeply entrenched in some states.
 Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

OhioBlue  (1000+ posts)      Sat Nov-14-09 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #40
50. I wonder how many miners are Union anymore.
 My Uncle in WV is Union... he's one of a handful left at his mine that is actually still Union. Massey is very anti-union, and from what I understand most of the big companies broke the Unions a long time ago.

His son is a coal miner - he actually worked at Sago and was on the crew that was killed - he was off work that day b/c his leg had been crushed in a previous mine accident. He works in a different mine now... all non-union.

karynnj  (1000+ posts)        Sun Nov-15-09 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #47
52. Kerry held at least one hearing on clean coal technology when
 he chaired the Small Business Committee. He also covered it in a SFRC hearing. He was far more optimistic at the earlier hearing. The problem is that the results have not been promising. Kerry is driven by the scientists here, more than most.

I understand the problem that these states will face, but what is the alternative if you accept the science. For those Senators to close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ear and recite as a mantra "There is no such thing as global warming". The fact is that the bill might have to do things to insure the burden is minimized where it is highest. The problem is that if coal can not be cleaned sufficiently, there is no way to get carbon emissions low enough without forcing a change.

Ask yourself:

1) Do you believe the science? Now, the RW is hitting this hard because it is the place they need to hit to derail this.
2) If you believe the science, how can the limits be met making no real changes. Coal is the dirtiest fuel - even if it is what we have the most of.
3) Can we really be so short term oriented that we are willing to risk the future for a higher standard of living today. (Now, many have said that is not a necessary trade off, but as it is the worst case, it is worth considering and even then the better long term decision is to act wisely and cut emissions.  
 Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

 beachmom  (1000+ posts)      Sun Nov-15-09 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
51. Just so I understand this correctly:
 If an unpopular Democrat does something that is against progressive values (and getting an effective global climate change bill through Congress IS a progressive value), that Democrat is:

A Conservocrat
A Traitor
Corporate Dem
Needs to be primaried and PURGED!!!

But, when it's Al Franken and Russ Feingold .... well, maybe they had a good reason for it.

Interesting.  
 

Thanks a pant load Al.

[Ralph Wiggum]

I love it when DUmmies eat their own.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Even if it happened, it would "Affect their states" by making them warm enough to stay in all year!

 

[BlueStateSaint]

The beach bum primitive throws a mean curve, doesn't it?

[USA4ME]

Amazing what they have to say in order to cover up for their cult leaders.  Another shining example of how hypocracy comes so easy to them  The whole site should have been named contortionistunderground.

.

[JohnnyReb]

The whole point is to place a cost on carbon.

DUmmies are carbon based...more carbon than others probably so charge the dickens out of them for stupidity.

[Chris_]

Bad idea to start screwing with the coal industry,bad idea.

[GOBUCKS]

Don't get excited. What a democrat Senator calls "fair emissions allowances" will still double your heating bill, to shower money on moonbat enterprises like wind and solar.

[diesel driver]

karynnj  (1000+ posts)        Sun Nov-15-09 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #47
52. Kerry held at least one hearing on clean coal technology when
 he chaired the Small Business Committee. He also covered it in a SFRC hearing. He was far more optimistic at the earlier hearing. The problem is that the results have not been promising. Kerry is driven by the scientists here, more than most.

I understand the problem that these states will face, but what is the alternative if you accept the science. For those Senators to close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ear and recite as a mantra "There is no such thing as global warming". The fact is that the bill might have to do things to insure the burden is minimized where it is highest. The problem is that if coal can not be cleaned sufficiently, there is no way to get carbon emissions low enough without forcing a change.

Ask yourself:

1) Do you believe the science? Now, the RW is hitting this hard because it is the place they need to hit to derail this.
2) If you believe the science, how can the limits be met making no real changes. Coal is the dirtiest fuel - even if it is what we have the most of.
3) Can we really be so short term oriented that we are willing to risk the future for a higher standard of living today. (Now, many have said that is not a necessary trade off, but as it is the worst case, it is worth considering and even then the better long term decision is to act wisely and cut emissions.

I don't believe YOUR science concerning "globull warming/climate change".  It's all bullshit and propaganda, not science.... 

[TheSarge]

 The whole point is to place a cost on carbon

So when you get a bill from the Feds on your "personal internal carbon emissions" a.k.a. a breathing tax are you STILL gonna think it's a good idea to place a "cost on carbon"?

[littlelamb]

I love it when DUmmies eat their own.

it is funny to watch isn't 

[zeitgeist]

it is funny to watch isn't 

Interesting as this diversion is, what would be more fun would be to watch a Youtube of Senator "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me."  going Bat$hit crazy on a constituent who questions him about his motives.   

[NHSparky]

Hmmm...maybe even the stupidest mouth-breather in the Senate finally came to grips with the fact that if you turn off half the electricity in this country, people might not have such an easy time getting through winter...and it gets mighty cold in Minnesota come January...

[diesel driver]

Hmmm...maybe even the stupidest mouth-breather in the Senate finally came to grips with the fact that if you turn off half the electricity in this country, people might not have such an easy time getting through winter...and it gets mighty cold in Minnesota come January...

Even more so for Stuart when he will have to start spending those Januarys back in Minnesota in a few years if he votes FOR this POS....

[DumbAss Tanker]

Don't get excited. What a democrat Senator calls "fair emissions allowances" will still double your heating bill, to shower money on moonbat enterprises like wind and solar.

That's what really enrages me when the idiots in Washington start talking about 'Growing green jobs' and 'Solar and wind jobs creation.'  Those jobs can only exist in competition with hydrocarbon-based energy production by corrupting the actual economics of energy by one of two means - either hugely subsidizing the 'Green' alternatives, or penalty-taxing hydrocarbon-based energy production to the point that solar and wind become (Artificially) competitive.

EITHER approach makes energy MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE in the net for the current economic system!  The only economically rational way to deal with these technologies is to just keep up R&D (Though the wind power tech is pretty mature) and shelve any fielding until hydrocarbon stocks actually do become scarce enough that raw head-to-head economics vs. hydrocarbons makes them competitive...and that's a long damned time down the road!  

WTF is wrong with people that makes them so credulous and nearsighted that they can't figure this out?

[Chris_]

That's what really enrages me when the idiots in Washington start talking about 'Growing greeen jobs' and 'Solar and wind jobs creation.'  Those jobs can only exist in competition with hydrocarbon-based energy production by corrupting the actual economics of energy by one of two menas - either hugely subsidizing the 'Green' alternatives, or penalty-taxing hydrocarbon-based energy production to the point that solar and wind become (Artificially) competitive.

EITHER approach makes energy MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE in the net for the current economic system!  The only economically rational way to deal with these technologies is to just keep up R&D (Though the wind power tech is pretty mature) and shelve any fielding until hydrocarbon stocks actually do become scarce enough that raw head-to-head economics vs. hydrocarbons makes them competitive...and that's a long damned time down the road!   

WTF is wrong with people that makes them so credulous and nearsighted that they can't figure this out?

Because it is all about ideology, and not economics or science........

doc

[zeitgeist]

Because it is all about ideology, and not economics or science........

doc

Well that, and, it touches their inner racist:  Wind and clouds are white and wonderful.  Coal is black and smells.

[AllosaursRus]

That's what really enrages me when the idiots in Washington start talking about 'Growing green jobs' and 'Solar and wind jobs creation.'  Those jobs can only exist in competition with hydrocarbon-based energy production by corrupting the actual economics of energy by one of two means - either hugely subsidizing the 'Green' alternatives, or penalty-taxing hydrocarbon-based energy production to the point that solar and wind become (Artificially) competitive.

EITHER approach makes energy MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE in the net for the current economic system!  The only economically rational way to deal with these technologies is to just keep up R&D (Though the wind power tech is pretty mature) and shelve any fielding until hydrocarbon stocks actually do become scarce enough that raw head-to-head economics vs. hydrocarbons makes them competitive...and that's a long damned time down the road!   

WTF is wrong with people that makes them so credulous and nearsighted that they can't figure this out?

Not only that, but most of their "Green" jobs head over seas where the Chicoms can pay 39 cents/hour for labor, then send the parts back to us so union thugs makin' $35/hr can take weeks installing what you or I could do in a coupla days! All the time being supplied fresh cash from some bullshitter's bureaucracy!