1 - 9
In response to:

EPA Energy Policy: "Crucify them"

chuchuredka Wrote: Apr 28, 2012 10:47 AM
Cut out these liberal straw man arguments, Curtis. Why do you jump from a debate about the reasonableness of EPA edicts to, if you argue with me it indicates that you want no effort to punish lawbreakers? The thrust of the article is about how this administration is deliberately trying to shutdown the fossil fuel industries. Examples of their egregious behavior is the mandate for refineries to blend nonexistent biofuels into gasoline or pay a fine. Since noone makes these biofuels, refiners are paying the fines which adds to the price of gasoline. Or the hysteria over the use of hydraulic fracturing and the EPA efforts to tie it to water contamination, earthquakes, and ozone depletion without a shred of evidence to back their claims.
Please itmize the fossil fuel subsidies you refer to.
The Wall Street Journal stated that the new jobless claims have been revised upward for 57 of the last 58 weeks. The chance of this occurance being a random statistical event is 0.0000001%.
Good points. And don'tforget, he also added nearly 5million more to the disability rolls and we know based on real government data that the vast majority of these disability awards went to young people and also that the data shows that 8 out of 10 will never reenter the work force. So they will pay no social security, no taxes, and drain the system for the rest of their lives.
Dig up Robert Byrd and Jack Murtha and ask them!!!
What an idiotic compilation with no links to cause and effect. Lifespans have increased because of better diet thanks to American farmers, better health inovations due to the medical and pharmacuetical companies, rivers were cleaned up long before the Employment Prevention Agency came into existence. We gradute fewer engineers than we did 50 years ago, but we have tripled the number of lawyers graduating in the same timespan, and we also turn out more AB and BA certificates by a 5 to 1 increase in the same time period. It is common knowledge that great societies are built by the efforts of engineers and scientists. Your blather which attributes societal advancement to government bureaucracy is a scatological analysis.
In response to:

Word to Obama: Solar Still Sucks

chuchuredka Wrote: Apr 05, 2012 10:01 PM
PLease list the subsidies to Big Oil, flamer!~ I am asking for those items big oil receives and no other manufacturing company receives. I am waiting, waiting, waiting, zzzzz.
In response to:

Word to Obama: Solar Still Sucks

chuchuredka Wrote: Apr 05, 2012 9:56 PM
That is nice madman, but where are you getting the water to clean these panels after the myriad dust storms, and how are you planning to transmit the power? Oh, and what is the production density(MWH per acre of land used), and the backup system for when the sun doesn't shine or is blocked out?
In response to:

Obama Expands War on Energy to Coal

chuchuredka Wrote: Apr 02, 2012 9:18 PM
Sure, we need a transition to "green energy" like we need a hole in the head. Another solar manufacturer and power producer went belly up today-name is SOLAR FIRST. They were to build a 1000 megawatt per day plant, the largest in the world. Another couple of billion tax payer dollars down the drain. In producing energy, density is one of the most important factors. No green energy has a competitive density factor. It takes up too much land and too much raw materials for the energy generated, is cost prohibitive, and unreliable. Other than those minor setbacks, it is a liberals wet dream.
1 - 9