Natwerk Designs

What are your thoughts on Obama's most recent energy and environment speech?

A few excerpts: "America’s dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that our nation has faced. It bankrolls dictators, pays for nuclear proliferation and funds both sides of our struggle against terrorism. It puts the American people at the mercy of shifting gas prices, stifles innovation, and sets back our ability to compete. These urgent dangers to our national and economic security are compounded by the long-term threat of climate change, which, if left unchecked, could result in violent conflict, terrible storms, shrinking coastlines, and irreversible catastrophe." "The days of Washington dragging its heels are over. My administration will not deny facts; we will be guided by them. We cannot afford to pass the buck or push the burden onto the states. And that’s why I’m directing the Environmental Protection Agency to immediately review the denial of the California waiver request and determine the best way forward." Full text here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601147_pf.html What do you think about this speech? Jim - your (lack of) logic astounds me. 'A' happens in California, 'B' happens in California, so 'A' must cause 'B'. Why not just blame the delay on gay marriage in San Francisco and Britney Spears' baby and surfing? LOL! whoops I meant Tomcat. I'm just so used to Jim's logic I guess.

Public Comments

1. again ridiculous there is now a consensus abotu global cooling and there is an even stronger consensus that climate change is all natural and not man made and also we have over 300 years worth of oil sands and oil shale in the USA combines with oil in alaska and new deposits in the USA, we are good to go we are not dwindling on oil, this is so much crap and if you think im lying you can look it up about the oil shale and sands and also by reducing green house gases, it makes companies spend more money which gives the company 2 options A. raise prices on goods, but then they wont compete with foreign brands B. they will out source their factories to 3rd world nations where they will continue spewing toxins everywhere, so that they can compete with foreign companies as you can see, out sourcing is bad and makes americans lose jobs which I dont know why obama would want to do that to us, I really do wonder about these politicians
2. Meanwhile controller John Chiang has told Californians he would delay sending out $3.7 billion in tax refunds and other payments because the state was running out of money. Why, probably because of financially crippling environmental policies that have done nothing to help Californians, all in a futile attempt to address climate change that has almost nothing to do with humanity. Whatever Dana, I don't really understand what the ABC's have to do with the federal government allowing states to bankrupt themselves worrying about climate change. But to answer your question, it's just lip service to make people like you think he really cares.
3. He's actully doing something I was wanting to happen. Driving the final nails into the coffins of the rotten three in Detroit. No more unions, YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. If he's so worried about bankrolling dictators, then why is his administration already starting to restrict the use of American coal in an attempt to force us into using currently more expensive and less viable technologies such as wind? When you consider how much co2 countries like China and India emit, and the fact that they don't plan on doing anything to reduce their emissions, then it seems pretty silly for the U.S. to block things like coal plants in a vain attempt to reduce co2 emissions to "save the world". EDIT: In order to stop "bank rolling" dictators, we need to use our current energy resources while we develop alternatives. What part of that can't environmentalists get through their heads? The switch to alternatives is not instantaneous. EDIT: I have no problem with Obama wanting to create a new green industry, but I don't believe that we should hinder the use of current American sources of energy.
5. I am very excited to have a president who really 'gets it'. It's nice to have climate change finally addressed in direct ways, and the sick part of me feels vindicated to have the deniers up in arms huffing and puffing.
6. Obama is severley misguided on this issue. The only type of person that would peddle this nonsense is an Amerca hating communist!
7. he starts on oil dependancy, a good move, as it illustrates that even if folk are not yet convinced by the immediate danger of a.g.w. there are other pressing reasons for these changes. many economists and scientists concur and have pointed out the 'two for one' benefits of investing in renewables and energy efficiency and infrastructure right now; http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/01/yvo1.html i am so pleased to see this bit; "Finally, we will make it clear to the world that America is ready to lead. To protect our climate and our collective security, we must call together a truly global coalition." hooray! at last, after 8 years of stalling, we can get a proper world agreement. its nearly too late, we dont have much time to get this bloomin tanker turned around!
8. It's about time. America is built on change. We have been falling behind for eight years now.
9. B. Hussein Obama is dangerously naive in so many ways it's absolutely stunning that the American people were stupid enough to elect him.
10. Like I said, the political debate is over and the internet is the last place the deniers will have a voice. But the internet debate is meaningless as far as having any real impact on policy at least for the next 4 years. There will always remain the few soldiers in the jungle, surviving by eating bugs, and fighting a lost war as the rest of the world moves on and rebuilds for the future. But they are as strategically relevant as the tomahawk in the age of the ICBM. semper vacuus
11. The left and those that want to see an end to the superpower status of America are rejoicing. Obama has proved that he is an ultra leftist after all. Since he ignores history, he is doomed to failure. His problem will be trying to pin that failure on Bush. "America’s dependence on oil is one of the most serious threats that our nation has faced. It bankrolls dictators, pays for nuclear proliferation and funds both sides of our struggle against terrorism. It puts the American people at the mercy of shifting gas prices, stifles innovation, and sets back our ability to compete. We are at the mercy of shifting gas prices huh? Karl Marx is extremely happy in his grave to here this sort of nonsense. So is Barak promising that we won't be dependent on shifting energy costs in his future. He is long on promises and short on actual solutions. His proposed solutions will be the problem. He goes on to suggest that if left unchecked, could result in violent conflict, terrible storms, shrinking coastlines, and irreversible catastrophe. This is a disgusting irresponsible thing to say. It is completely without merit and empty propaganda. "The days of Washington dragging its heels are over. My administration will not deny facts; we will be guided by them. We cannot afford to pass the buck or push the burden onto the states. Let him take responsibility for his actions then. Let the blame game begin. I would like to point out to you Obamafiles. He ran on tax cuts and moderation. He has now revealed his stripes. Those that were naive enough to vote for him will punish the rest of us that actually pay attention and bother to learn things.
12. He is a true leader, one that America deserves to have. He is aware of the challenges the nation and the world are facing, and is willing to move forward. I hope other leaders follow his example too. The world would be such a better place.