Posted: 23 Sep 2008 11:46 AM CDT
Joe Biden was in Ohio recently and the video above shows his answer to an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal to where, among other comments, Biden said, "We're not supporting clean coal." This directly contradicts Barack Obama's stated position.
The Politico reports the coal comments from Biden, who is the vice presidential running mate to Barack Obama for the Democratic ticket, which included statements about China polluting our air with their coal plants, he states, "No coal plants here in America," he goes on to say "Build them, if they're going to build them, over there. Make them clean," and "We're not supporting clean coal."
Starting with Barack Obama's website, on his New Energy page, under the header of "Create Millions Of New Green Jobs," the fourth highlighted entry directly references clean coal where it says:
On September 20, 2008, the LA Times published science questions and answers from both John McCain and Barack Obama which, in part, dealt with the issue of energy and clean coal was once again spoken about by Obama.
The question was "What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change -- a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research?
Barack Obama's answer:
Specifically, I will implement a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. I will start reducing emissions immediately by establishing strong annual reduction targets with an intermediate goal of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
On May 13, 2008, ABC News reported that both Clinton and Obama were wooing voters in West Virginia and Kentucky and both spoke about clean coal.
Not to be outdone, Senator Obama's campaign has distributed flyers in Kentucky stating that "Barack Obama believes in clean Kentucky coal." The flyers show a picture of giant barges carrying coal down the Ohio River.
Obama is on record, in many places as being for clean coal technology.
Joe Biden, hasn't been a proponent of clean coal in the United States, as the video above shows as well as an interview he participated in back in 2007, with Grist, where he was asked "What role does "clean coal" play in your vision for energy independence and climate security?
I don't think there's much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I do think there's a significant role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change. Clean-coal technology is not the route to go in the United States, because we have other, cleaner alternatives. But I would invest a considerable amount of money in research and development of clean-coal and carbon-sequestration technologies for export. China is building one new coal-fired plant per week. That's not going to change unless there's a fundamental change in technology, because they have about 300 years of dirty coal, and they're going to use it
Clean coal is a technology that would either turn coal to gas before burning, or else bury the carbon emissions deep underground after burning.
Biden's opposition to clean coal is not new and there is no rule in politics stating a vice presidential candidate must agree with the presidential candidate for their party on every issue that faces them.
With that said, stating publicly "We're not supporting clean coal," as Joe Biden did, implies he is speaking for the campaign stance and not just his personal stance, which puts him at odds and in direct contradiction of Barack Obama stated stance.
Posted: 23 Sep 2008 10:01 AM CDT
I am just going to post the announcement given at Digital Journal where DigitalJournal.com Editor-in-Chief, Chris Hogg and myself will be live blogging the presidential debate on Friday evening.
We're happy to announce live coverage of the first U.S. presidential debate this Friday Sept. 26, 2008 at 9 p.m. EST. We've teamed up with a citizen journalist to offer play-by-play commentary, insight, opinion and debate. Join us and share your thoughts!
Note to Wake up America readers: Feel free to come join in the conversation, everyone will be welcome and it should be a fun event.
Posted: 22 Sep 2008 10:21 PM CDT
Crossposted from Stop the ACLU:
Since the current financial crisis is taking place under a Republican administration it is easy for people to automatically blame Republicans. The media have happily pushed this misconception too. Facts the media ignore are things such as the very groundwork for today's problems being rooted in legislation created by Jimmy Carter , or that in 2003 President Bush proposed "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis that was blocked by Democrats on party lines. However, the media don't report these very important and significant facts and so it is no wonder that the GOP takes the brunt of the blame in this recent CNN poll.
new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll suggests that by a 2-to-1 margin, Americans blame Republicans over Democrats for the financial crisis that has swept across the country the past few weeks — one factor that may have contributed to an apparent increase in Barack Obama's edge over John McCain in the race for the White House.
Is it possible that these registered voters are basing their opinions without the full facts? Well, I'm sure the polls would not reflect so favorably for Barack Obama if the American people were properly informed that Fannie and Freddie co-opted over $120,000 to Barack Obama over less than four years.
Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.
Perhaps the polls wouldn't reflect so negatively for Senator John McCain if the public were informed that during the same timeframe Obama was pocketing money from these corrupted institutions, John McCain was fighting to reform them.
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.
Posted: 22 Sep 2008 06:27 PM CDT
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Said Samuel Johnson to Mr. Boswell, and Mr. Boswell and the world took note and remembered. Yet those who most often and most lovingly remind us of this famous aphorism are almost invariably those of a particular breed of skeptic who consider all national loyalties of any kind to be automatically suspect. However they seldom if ever repeat the second part of that renowned quotation, and by this slippery sin of omission they completely distort the true intent of the original phrase.
"But let it be considered," Mr. Boswell continues, "that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self-interest."
Boswell Life of Samuel Johnson
How then are we to determine what is or is not a "real and generous love of our country", and what is merely "pretended patriotism" and just a "cloak of self-interest."? Who then is a patriot? And who is not? Who is our true friend? And who is our true foe?
The people whom we are fighting against are often some of the nicest people in the world. But they are nonetheless wrong. Very wrong. And they do hurt us. And they don't even see it. These people, often our friends and relatives and neighbors, often suffer from the worst sort of hubris. The pride of sanctified opinion. The firm belief that their opinions, no matter how grossly uninformed or ill-founded have value just because they are their opinions. They see themselves as superior patriots, honorable but objective physicians who are willing to tell their patient the truth about their serious condition, no matter how distasteful it may be. Telling their patients the awful truth has in point of fact become their sacred role, their primary function. Only in this way do they have a chance of saving their suffering charges. And if the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, then so be it. It must be done. It is to be seen as a painful but necessary catharsis.
However, just beneath the surface of this high-minded rhetoric, one can smell that familiar and unmistakable odor of unbounded pride and self-importance. Above all else, our dubiously sincere critics wish to appear profound and well-informed. The concept of actually becoming profound and well-informed through hard work and diligent study is evidently beyond the scope of their apprehension. They remain utterly content and unmoved by the force of reality. They have learned all that they need to know. And that is all that they need to learn.
How often have we seen some well thought-out essay, an obvious product of a great expenditure of effort and research, casually dismissed out of hand by a one sentence insult, or buy some oh-so-clever quip by one of these self-appointed Guardians of Truth. Yet, remarkably, and invariably, these very same people will without the slightest hesitation describe themselves unabashedly as patriots, true patriots who love their country and only wish to help her through her absolutely essential catharsis. In short, they say, the truth hurts. And their truth is of course the only unquestioned version.
God save us from these 'true patriots'. With patriots like these who needs enemies? If these are, as I propose, our false patriots, who then are our true patriots? What after all is said and done, is a true patriot?
First and foremost a patriot is loyal. He has made an oath and he intends to keep it. A patriot is steadfast, he does not waver in the ever-changing winds of opinion. A patriot loves his country and is supportive of her. He does not look for ways to undermine the moral integrity of his country during a time of her utmost peril, during a time of war.
A patriot's primary concern is in defending his country against any and all assaults upon her character, whether they come from enemies within or from enemies abroad. A patriot does not exercise his right to free speech in order to slander his own home and nation. He does not hold the delusional conceit that by publicly admonishing his country for her purported past and present blunders and atrocities he is thereby somehow helping her. He will not expend his energies seeking to find some new flaws in the character of his country, but rather does whatever he can do to defend her from the attacks of those who would happily bring her down. A patriot is not ashamed to be a trustworthy and loyal champion of his country. Rather, he is her proud protector and her shield. A patriot is unconcerned that his patriotism may be called simplistic and shallow by those false patriots. A patriot who is willing to sacrifice his very life for his honest love of country is not that easily cowed by these petty and effete naysayers.
A patriot does not mindlessly parrot the borrowed opinions of others merely based upon their current popularity. His is totally unconcerned about whether his patriotism is or is not in fashion this year. A patriot does his own independent research and thinks before he speaks. He will not allow his careless words to be used by his country's enemies as weapons to wound her. Rather, a patriot will use his well-chosen words and his deeds to lift his country up even higher.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, patriots are deeply aware of their value to their community and their country. Patriots love life and they love their families, but are nonetheless willing to sacrifice themselves for their community and their country, not with that blind unthinking obedience of a totalitarian slave, but with an open-hearted generosity and love. With that 'real and generous love of country' of which our good Mister Boswell spoke so long ago.
Posted: 22 Sep 2008 05:04 PM CDT
Sarah Palin has seen Internet rumors and personal attacks since the day it was announced she would be the GOP Veep. Attacks on her children to false claims about her policies, Palin has largely ignored them to expose how petty the attackers are.
The first attacks were immediate, coming from the popular liberal website called Daily Kos which accused Sarah Palin of pretending to be the mother of her youngest child, Trig, who has down syndrome and attacking her daughter with claims that she was the real mother.
Palin announced that her daughter was pregnant and video footage of interviews conducted while in her last months of pregnancy showed those original attacks to be lies and nothing more than rumors reported as news.
From there a long list of rumors started being spread, to which Fact Check.org investigated and exposed them for being lies or mass misrepresentations.
Book banning, belonging to a separatist group called the Alaskan Independence Party, claims she supported Pat Buchanon were all debunked by Fact Check in a piece they called "Sliming Palin."
A few examples of the attacks that have been debunked by Fact Check .org. are:
*Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent
*She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time.
*She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party
*Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president.
*Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools
Other than having a group called the Truth Squad formed to counter online rumor and lies, Palin herself has generally gone about doing her job as the vice presidential candidate, helping to raise campaign funds, making campaign stops, giving interviews and interacting with the people of America from state to state.
Those attacking her on a constant basis are basically being completely ignored by her and I think it is a good strategy on her part to allow those attacking to show themselves for the what they are, small, petty and willing to lie and spread those rumors and lies amongst themselves, with others watching and witnessing, noticing and speaking, about how in their desire to attack, they are ruining their own reputations and any credibility they might have once had.
These are the same type of people that will accuse their opponents of smears, lies and accuse them of attacking others, yet they themselves are becoming the worst offenders of all they speak about.
Better yet as reported by The Hill today, Palin is using those attacks against her for campaign fundraising, turning the tables on her attackers and using their tactics as a tool to help garner support for John McCain and the Republican party.
Why bother getting into the mud with her attackers when she can let them show themselves for what they are and use the public's perception of such attacks and the lowering public opinion of her attackers, to her benefit.
Posted: 22 Sep 2008 04:25 PM CDT
At least 13 people have been injured in Jerusalem as a driver plowed his BMW into a group of soldiers in Jerusalem's Old City late Monday, with the driver of the car being shot and killed according to Associated Press.
Reports say the driver was a Palestinian resident of east Jerusalem who was acting alone when he drove his vehicle into a group of soldiers, injuring 13 before a soldier shot and killed the driver.
According to Israel TVF the vehicle was registered to a resident of Jabel Mukaber, an Arab village inside the city limits.
Two of the 13 injured are reported to be in serious condition and the others suffered light wounds.
It was the third attack in Jerusalem in which vehicles have been used as weapons in recent months. In July, two Palestinians living in Jerusalem carried out separate attacks using heavy construction machinery that killed three people and injured several others. Both attackers were fatally shot by police and soldiers.
Reuters reports that a police spokesperson, Micky Rosenfeld, said, "A man in a vehicle struck a number of people in Kikar Tzahal. We can confirm it was a terror attack. The man was shot and killed."
Reuters figures show up to 15 people were injured.
|You are subscribed to email updates from Wake up America |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email Delivery powered by FeedBurner|
|Inbox too full? Subscribe to the feed version of Wake up America in a feed reader.|
|If you prefer to unsubscribe via postal mail, write to: Wake up America, c/o FeedBurner, 20 W Kinzie, 9th Floor, Chicago IL USA 60610|