DC Tom Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 I just finished watching her whole speech last night. She's smart, and seems like (similar to Barack Obama) someone who has not been corrupted by the system yet. I still don't understand why she doesn't want to invest into other energy sources besides oil. Oil oil oil, I'm starting to hate that stuff, there do exists other resources on this planet. No, not really. Find another energy source that packs as many joules of energy in so transportable a form. And why would anyone be surprised she's "into" oil. A governor of Alaska? First thing that popped in to my mind when I heard McCain chose her was "I wonder what her oil connections are?"
billfan63 Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 I still don't understand why she doesn't want to invest into other energy sources besides oil. Oil oil oil, oil and gas revenue provided 88% of Alaskan general fund
Kelly the Dog Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 She did, also, create a bunch of new jobs, housing and labs in Wasilla
molson_golden2002 Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 I wonder how local residents are going to react when McCain tries to stick nuclear power plants in their back yards? Boy, that would be depressing seeing them building one down the road!
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 Any moment now I look to see the "Sarah Palin Masturbates and Eats Monkey Guts" thread to be posted. How much for the leettle girls? Leettle girls? How much for thee Russian? Ya, you are very credible.
finknottle Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 I wonder how local residents are going to react when McCain tries to stick nuclear power plants in their back yards? Boy, that would be depressing seeing them building one down the road! I think you over-estimate the opposition to nuclear power. In fact, I would lay money that given a choice, people would rather see a nuclear power plant in their neighborhood than a coal plant or a refineary.
molson_golden2002 Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 I think you over-estimate the opposition to nuclear power. In fact, I would lay money that given a choice, people would rather see a nuclear power plant in their neighborhood than a coal plant or a refineary. Maybe. But McCain is laying it out on a national level, but as they say, all politics is local and these things would have to go somewhere. Its the same with the refineries that everyone is complaining haven't been built. I think its a no go. Especially as many as he wants. Its my understanding that major new natural gas deposits have become accessable very recently and that will drain investment away from other eletricity sources for at least a decade or maybe more, so that would further undermine the nuclear angle...and hurt wind and solar investment as well
finknottle Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 Maybe. But McCain is laying it out on a national level, but as they say, all politics is local and these things would have to go somewhere. Its the same with the refineries that everyone is complaining haven't been built. I think its a no go. Especially as many as he wants. My point is not to be snippy - I genuinely think that the democratic party is out-of-touch on this issue, and that people could care less. But the party treats it like a third rail, and assumes the country is with them 100% in their revulsion. And ironically, on this issue they are as guilty of ignoring science as the republicans are on climate change. Just my opinion.
molson_golden2002 Posted September 4, 2008 Posted September 4, 2008 My point is not to be snippy - I genuinely think that the democratic party is out-of-touch on this issue, and that people could care less. But the party treats it like a third rail, and assumes the country is with them 100% in their revulsion. And ironically, on this issue they are as guilty of ignoring science as the republicans are on climate change. Just my opinion. The only thing I'm sure of on this is that NIMBY would be a major problem. And just like with global warming, people have brought up serious issues. Accident, terrorist attack or something else. And some people argue that nuclear power is just as bad in producing green house gases because of the mining of uranium and other things in the process. I have no idea if that's true but just like Global Warning deniers, I'm in no position to say they are wrong. To me, wind and sun seems like the best alternative. NIMBY would be a problem there, but not as much, because people are not scared of pollution or the thing blowing sky high
finknottle Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 To me, wind and sun seems like the best alternative. NIMBY would be a problem there, but not as much, because people are not scared of pollution or the thing blowing sky high Agreed, more or less, but wind farms are killing grounds for migrating birds. Most people chortle at that objection, but it bothers me a great deal more than a nuclear power plant.
DC Tom Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 She did, also, create a bunch of new jobs, housing and labs in Wasilla Although arguably, since they identified and closed that many meth labs, that's evidence of effective leadership...
swede316 Posted September 5, 2008 Posted September 5, 2008 Anti Gun Control R, but want background checks completed before purchase or otherwise and if a domestic violence restraining order has ever been effect, that person should be precluded from owning a gun.The aready have it..It's called Insta-Check...When you buy a gun..You fill out the paperwork, show your state ID and they make a call to the federal data center...If you have no felony record...You are good to go.
Recommended Posts