If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   "I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels." Natural gas = fossil fuel. Don't worry though, it isn't like the speaker of the House needs to understand energy issues   (msnbc.msn.com) divider line 289
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

14375 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Aug 2008 at 2:06 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



289 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-08-26 11:50:04 AM
I'm sure she meant "traditional fossil fuels." Non-story.

This is what's wrong with politics today. Nobody reads between the lines in communication; everyone is a literalist. I fear for what the next generation of politicians are going to be like. Because it won't be better than what we have now, that's for sure.
 
2008-08-26 11:53:06 AM
Natural gas is the vapor that forms on top of oil deposits, right?

I remember that from the old guy in the tanker belly in Waterworld. No way anybody could do that.
 
2008-08-26 11:53:43 AM
GaryPDX: Conniving coont. Try and convince me she's not enriching herself with T Boone Pickens at the expense of the American people. She has Congressional control to direct land grabs, water rights and public money to her new business partner. Remember kids, on Jan 1st trillions in alternative energy investment incentives expire all across the land. Pelosi and Pickens doesn't want any competition on alternative development.

Does America really want to just exchange energy tyrants? Or would we rather invest in technology that makes each of us independent with energy?


What he said.
 
2008-08-26 11:55:23 AM
NikolaiFarkoff: I'm sure she meant "traditional fossil fuels." Non-story.

This is what's wrong with politics today. Nobody reads between the lines in communication; everyone is a literalist. I fear for what the next generation of politicians are going to be like. Because it won't be better than what we have now, that's for sure.


this. I am not sure about the actual viability of biogas, but its clear that this was the sort of alternative she was speaking to.
 
2008-08-26 11:57:18 AM
NikolaiFarkoff: I'm sure she meant "traditional fossil fuels." Non-story.

Yeah...that's it!
 
2008-08-26 11:57:36 AM
GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

It's 22000 shares of T Boone Pickens company..22000 shares of a startup with trillions upon trillions growth potential that Nancy controls from Congress...give me a farking break.

/lying sack of shiat


So this is the new Talking Points meme?
 
2008-08-26 11:58:56 AM
Nestea Plunge: GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

It's 22000 shares of T Boone Pickens company..22000 shares of a startup with trillions upon trillions growth potential that Nancy controls from Congress...give me a farking break.

/lying sack of shiat

So this is the new Talking Points meme?


Nice counter argument.
 
2008-08-26 12:00:27 PM
Yeah, well, that was pretty stupid. I get what she meant, but...

Pelosi is pretty damn stupid on energy policy. She really hasn't helped us out in California with our many woes on that issue. She never seems to focus on anything remotely practical.

Natural gas is a great energy source, though.
 
2008-08-26 12:00:37 PM
Nestea Plunge: So this is the new Talking Points meme?

Only if you reduce a clear conflict of interest by someone with the power to influence the country's energy policy and potentially reap an untold fortune through a business venture that stands to benefit directly from said policy, then, yes, yes it is a meme. I guess we can reduce it to the level of meaningless campaign jargon, like "drain the swamp." Can't really remember who said that one, though...
 
2008-08-26 12:01:11 PM
i149.photobucket.com
May be she meant `natural gas' collected from alternate sources?
 
2008-08-26 12:01:44 PM
Nestea Plunge: So this is the new Talking Points meme?

The new TPM is STFU and open your eyes. You got hoodwinked in the last election. You should consider that over the next couple of months when you listen to the candidates.
 
2008-08-26 12:02:06 PM
Funny part is, I know that all the righties who will jump all over her for leaving out "traditional" before "fossil fuels" are the same ones that actually think "offshore drilling" is a sound energy policy. And the irony of this will sail right over their dense little skulls.

At least she ACKNOWLEDGES that there alternative energy sources, you twits. But you just keep on backing the GOP and their ongoing plan to financially and ethically bankrupt all of Western society. See how that works out for ya.
 
2008-08-26 12:03:40 PM
lunchinlewis: The new TPM is STFU and open your eyes.

Ain't gonna happen.
 
2008-08-26 12:04:13 PM
lunchinlewis: in the last election

Congressional, that is.
 
2008-08-26 12:05:44 PM
MaxxLarge: Funny part is, I know that all the righties who will jump all over her for leaving out "traditional" before "fossil fuels" are the same ones that actually think "offshore drilling" is a sound energy policy. And the irony of this will sail right over their dense little skulls.

At least she ACKNOWLEDGES that there alternative energy sources, you twits. But you just keep on backing the GOP and their ongoing plan to financially and ethically bankrupt all of Western society. See how that works out for ya.


Offshore drilling and exploration of alternative energy sources aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Offshore drilling is but a minor facet of an overall energy policy. It's not going to fix the problem long term, and anyone saying that is either wildly optimistic or simply wrong. If, however, a lift on the ban is made part of a more comprehensive policy geared towards ultimate energy independence and more varied sources and can help alleviate some of the cost to consumers during the years it will take to make that transition, then what, may I ask, is so awful about allowing states to determine for themselves whether or not to allow offshore drilling?
 
2008-08-26 12:11:50 PM
GaryPDX: I like natural gas. I'm looking at a system that will power my current house all on natural gas, including electricity. Wait until Jan 1st when all the solar and wind projects that aren't complete start shutting down because of the incentive expirations. We have 19 commercial solar and wind projects in Oregon at risk of shutting down that's to Pelosi. Twenty percent of all those investments is BIG money. Look around, all the current project are in high gear to complete by the end of the year.

Uh, no, but whatever.

Kudos to you for trying to switch to natural gas. Pay attention to what those MIT guys just did as well.
 
2008-08-26 12:12:07 PM
GaryPDX: Does America really want to just exchange energy tyrants?

I've been trying (and failing) to convince the morons I go to college with that diving headfirst into corn ethanol would produce a Corn Lobby as powerful and -eventually- as evil as the Oil Lobby. Just because we'd be getting reamed domestically, they don't seem to grasp it.
 
2008-08-26 12:16:30 PM
MR. BROKAW: But you're also in a position to influence where the emphasis will be in where we're moving.

REP. PELOSI: Well, that's not--that is, that is the marketplace. The fact is, the supply of natural gas is so big, and you do need a transition if you're going to go from fossil fuels, as you say, you can't do it overnight, but you must transition. These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives. You have to ask yourself why, why is the administration not doing this? This is the challenge of our generation. It's a national security issue. President Nixon said we must end our dependence on foreign oil. President Carter said it's a moral equivalent of war. It's a national security issue, it's an economic issue, it's an environmental health issue, and it is a moral issue to protect this environment.


What a total farking dodge -- just be straight Nancypants and say "yes, I do influence the direction."
 
2008-08-26 12:21:10 PM
Oh no! The speaker was wrong! Send her to Czechoslovakia or the border of Iraq and Gaffenanistan.
 
2008-08-26 12:21:27 PM
So, if it is a conflict of interest for congressmen to have investments, why is it such a scandal that Joe Biden is worth so little?
 
2008-08-26 12:21:55 PM
lunchinlewis: Congressional, that is.

We assumed that even without all the words being present, that's how the power to understand what someone means actually works. Thanks.

Besides, it'd be pretty absurd to think of one of you guys finding fault with any other elections in recent years.
 
2008-08-26 12:22:39 PM
I heat my house with panda bear oil and that's the way I likes it!
 
2008-08-26 12:25:03 PM
Skleenar: So, if it is a conflict of interest for congressmen to have investments, why is it such a scandal that Joe Biden is worth so little?

No, it's not, but she does have influence over energy policy, she does appear to have a stake in it, and many politicians utilize a blind trust while in office. Even Dick Cheney moved his investments into a blind trust. For people who were screaming (I'm not saying you) about Bush and Cheney's closed door meetings with energy industry insiders when setting their energy policy - and yes, that did look shady - to not be raising some stink about this is rather inconsisitent, to put it politely.
 
2008-08-26 12:31:36 PM
GaryPDX: And what do you mean "uh, no" on the alternative energy expirations? That's a hard fact scheduled to expire Jan 1st. Any project not complete by that date will lose 20% of the investment to the government. Every project in Oregon is in high gear to complete construction.

Which particular initiative are you saying expires?
 
2008-08-26 12:38:30 PM
What's so nontraditional about natural gas?
 
2008-08-26 12:40:36 PM
haha, you totally got her! what an idiot!

/too bad she's right if you ignore the slip of the tongue
//and her being right shows she knows more about the energy issue than you let on
 
2008-08-26 12:44:02 PM
burndtdan: //and her being right shows she knows more about the energy issue than you let on

Proven by her personal investment strategies.
 
2008-08-26 12:45:56 PM
burndtdan: haha, you totally got her! what an idiot!

/too bad she's right if you ignore the slip of the tongue
//and her being right shows she knows more about the energy issue than you let on


She's definitely putting her money where her mouth is, I guess.
 
2008-08-26 12:46:40 PM
What you guys are talking about is an inevitable consequence of a culture that worships money.
 
2008-08-26 12:47:19 PM
Rev.K: I heat my house with panda bear oil and that's the way I likes it!

You switched from Baby oil?
 
2008-08-26 12:55:41 PM
adiabat:
You switched from Baby oil?


I had to, the hospital was getting suspicious.
 
2008-08-26 12:56:53 PM
Nabb1: No, it's not, but she does have influence over energy policy, she does appear to have a stake in it, and many politicians utilize a blind trust while in office. Even Dick Cheney moved his investments into a blind trust. For people who were screaming (I'm not saying you) about Bush and Cheney's closed door meetings with energy industry insiders when setting their energy policy - and yes, that did look shady - to not be raising some stink about this is rather inconsisitent, to put it politely.

I don't necessarily consider this an inconsistency.

I suppose if people who cried foul about the Cheney Task Force thought that the reason it was shady was that Cheney was going to get personally enriched, I suppose it might be.

But there were plenty of other things about those meetings that raised all sorts of flags (like the exploration maps of Iraq, for instance). And the probable reason for concern was more about paying the energy sector back for supporting the Bush/Cheney team than Cheney trying to personally profit off of an Administration energy program.

What you describe as Pelosi's problem is more one of the natural conflict that is inherent in the position of influencing legislation and having investments.
 
2008-08-26 01:02:05 PM
I came to this thread looking for retarded arguments, glad to see I wasn't disappointed.

Carry on.
 
2008-08-26 01:05:57 PM
I'm only here to say that if you're angry about Pelosi using her power to make money on specific stocks and you haven't been as angry about Cheney doing the same for the last 7.5 years, you're a partisan dick who is helping to destroy our country.

Vice-versa too.
 
2008-08-26 01:09:20 PM
Obdicut: Which particular initiative are you saying expires?

Most of those

I know you like to argue with Gary, but 1 Google and 3 clicks was all it took.
 
2008-08-26 01:10:55 PM
R.A.Danny: Proven by her personal investment strategies.

Nabb1: She's definitely putting her money where her mouth is, I guess.

it's true her actions on the subject are questionable. i think anything t. boone pickens does on any subject are questionable. doesn't mean they aren't right though.
 
2008-08-26 01:12:14 PM
Locke3k: as angry about Cheney doing the same for the last 7.5 years

Unlike Pelosi, the President and Vice President have all of their investments in Blind trusts.

Besides, Cheney gave 78% of his income to Charity last year. How 'bout you, Madame Speaker?
 
2008-08-26 01:24:44 PM
adiabat: the President and Vice President have all of their investments in Blind trusts.

As in, you're blind and you trust that Cheney has no Halliburton stock options? Even though Senator Lautenberg has done quite a bit of research on the subject and has shown that Cheney's Halliburton stock options alone went up roughly $7m in value in 2005 alone?

By the way, I also think Pelosi should completely forfeit her shares of Clean Energy Fuels Corp.
 
2008-08-26 01:27:58 PM
Flab: I know you like to argue with Gary, but 1 Google and 3 clicks was all it took.

Okay-- but what I was saying "no" to was that those expirations, if they do occurr-- which I do not believe they will-- are not Pelosi's fault. The GOP and the White House have been the main force working against those-- pinning their expiration on Pelosi is just... strange.

As long as the white house and the GOP withdraw their objections, which I think they will, those credits will be renewed.
 
2008-08-26 01:32:07 PM
gustakooka: Nestea Plunge: GaryPDX: REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

It's 22000 shares of T Boone Pickens company..22000 shares of a startup with trillions upon trillions growth potential that Nancy controls from Congress...give me a farking break.

/lying sack of shiat

So this is the new Talking Points meme?

Nice counter argument.


It is, am I right?
 
2008-08-26 01:32:47 PM
GaryPDX

So why do you blame Pelosi for that, and not the GOP and Bush?
 
2008-08-26 01:38:03 PM
All I know is that I don't want an economic policy from the woman who couldn't sell a dozen copies of her own book...despite being the highest female elected official in the history of the United States.
 
2008-08-26 01:41:03 PM
I_C_Weener: All I know is that I don't want an economic policy from the woman who couldn't sell a dozen copies of her own book...despite being the highest female elected official in the history of the United States.

I think Olympia Snowe would like to claim that honor.

I know, I know, she's not as "high", but I like her a lot more.
 
2008-08-26 01:41:40 PM
GaryPDX: Those are one thing Bush did good on. Nobody gives him any credit for all the alternative energy progress for the last 8 years. I can't say very much good about Bush but I've been working toward off grid status and these are Bush incentives so it's of particular interest to me. They have a scheduled end date and anything not complete by Dec 31st loses 20% of their investment.

Pelosi is solely responsible because she tabled the 09 Federal budget for the next administration, which means billions are at stake and there's one person responsible for this dilema...Nancy Pelosi.

The hot potato is they are "Bush" incentives. Now Pelosi has 20000 shares in T Boone Pickens?...c'mon..smell the coffee, mang.


Are you completely unaware of GOP opposition to those energy incentives?
 
2008-08-26 01:44:21 PM
Obdicut: I know, I know, she's not as "high", but I like her a lot more.

I meant highest ranking, but high works too. :)
 
2008-08-26 01:44:45 PM
lunchinlewis: The new TPM is STFU and open your eyes. You got hoodwinked in the last election. You should consider that over the next couple of months when you listen to the candidates.

So who do we vote for? We've been being 'hoodwinked' for the past fifty years. And during that time, not only do we keep electing the same people over and over, but we keep throwing our liberty at them hand over fist.

Should we vote McCain who seems to think that he's qualified for the presidency due to graduting 894/899 from then naval academy then getting held for 5.5 years in vietnam after crashing his third plane?

Or should we vote Obama who likes to talk a good game about change then taps one of Congress' most seasoned drug warriors as his veep?

Or maybe vote for somebody new, like Barr, so we can be called the lunitic fringe?

Screw opening your eyes, America, we need to start a revolution. And not a revolution of words, but a revolution of guns. If congresscritters really love their country, they should have no problem with their own blood being shed to make this country a better, more free place. The federal government should be more afraid of their citizens than their citizens are of them.

/I'm being watched by the secret service now, aren't i?
 
2008-08-26 01:57:57 PM
I'm being watched by the secret service now, aren't i?

Yes. Yes you are. WTF?
 
2008-08-26 02:00:41 PM
GaryPDX: Yes..some GOP'ers..the oil business people..but it was Bush who pushed them through and people invested in them. Why do you think we have wind farms all over the place? The ethanol plants are part of it too, over 100 have been built in the last few years. We just need the right source instead or corn.

So you don't know that the GOP opposed efforts to include extensions for these very credits you're talking about in the new energy bill?
 
2008-08-26 02:07:10 PM
GaryPDX: Up until they noticed how much money and infrastructure that is already in place, public opinion and their own money in those investments.

So your contention is they dropped their objections to it? Why wasn't it included in the bill, then?
 
2008-08-26 02:07:18 PM
Obdicut: So you don't know that the GOP opposed efforts to include extensions for these very credits you're talking about in the new energy bill?

This would be The Consumer First Energy Act?
 
Displayed 50 of 289 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report