Re: O/T: Opinion AKA: LipStick On A Pig
- From: tom_murphy@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 11, 10:10 am, N Hurst <nhu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 11, 8:51 am, Phil Again <notwantspam_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:20:32 +0000, Lew Hodgett wrote:
I'm glad women are starting to hold high positions not only in gov't,
but also in our political parties.
It has been a long road since the days of Margaret Chase Smith of Maine.
Choosing a women to run as your party's candidate for the 2nd highest
office is great, but it does not include the privilege of hiding behind
her skirts to avoid facing the issues.
"LipStick on a pig", as a vicious personal attack issue? Give me a
Let's hear about some issues.
McCain states, "Were going to shake things up in Washington".
Okay, it's his party he wants to shake up, go for it, but that is an
internal Republican party housekeeping problem, not a proposal to solve
Maybe he knows something the rest of us don't, but so far haven't heard
anything but the same old time political mumbo jumbo attack politics.
As I listen, "Where's the beef?", comes to mind.
When do we get a proposal to solve some of our problems?
I'd like to see something about any of the following:
* What is his proposal to address health care problems?
* What is proposal to address global warming issues?
* What is proposal to address alternate energy policies? (Drill baby
drill doesn't count. That's about like saying make more buggy whips to
make the cars go faster)
* What is proposal to address veteran's issues or do we just forget
about them? We owe them big time.
* What is his proposal to address fiscal problems?
* What is proposal to restore our position of leadership on the world
The list goes on (Iraq, etc), but a proposal on any of the above would
The silence on the critical issues facing us from McCain to date is
Based on his lack of response to date, one can only assume a
continuation of the last 8 years.
What am I missing?
What haven't I heard?
I freely admit I could, and most probably am, wrong on this, but here is
Example two: Am I the only person who thinks USA should outlaw the use of
Oil and diesel fuel from being used as fuel at large Electrical power
plants? And, should Taxpayers offer interest free loans to Utility plants
to convert from Oil power plants to Nat Gas? Am I the only person who
looks at electrical cars and asks "where and how is that electricity
being generated?" Is that electricity used by cars really all that
The pure electric cars (i.e. plugin, not gas/electric hybrid) are
going to be better for the environment because while yes, the large
power generators at the power company do create pollution, they're
generally more regulated and much more efficient than either the gas/
electric hybrid or the gas only car, or pretty much any internal
Think about it this way... you could run your house by firing up a 2kW
portable generator. But you know those things aren't as good as the
power company, because you don't run your house on those portable
generators unless you have to. They're prone to failure, are expensive
to operate (i.e. keeping fuel in them and repairing them when they
break), are inefficient, and are annoying to have on all the time.
So while an electric car is indeed causing pollution, it's going to be
overall less because of the economies of scale involved. For a small
generator to power the car, it might generate X tons of pollution,
whereas a power company to provide the same power, the pollution might
only be 50% of X, which is a better deal for everyone involved.
-Nathan- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
This seems to make sense and I'd guess that you are correct. But it's
one of those things that could be counterintuitive. I'd like to see
some data or at least a technical analysis. In that analysis, it would
be very interesting to know the NET effect in environmental impact. I
agree the the net is probably positive regarding electric cars, but I
have no idea whether it's a large or small improvement once you factor
in the "environmental cost" of generating the electricity.
Let's face it, popular culture is becoming very obsessed with being
"green" and the consumer industry has jumped on the bandwagon to milk
our sentiment for every possible $$. The upside is that it has raised
awareness. That's good, but it's not good if the economic load to "go
green" is MUCH larger than the REAL benefit to the environment. I'm
not saying that it's not worth it, I'm saying that I don't have enough
FACTUAL data to form a conclusion.
The bottom line is, these this are more complicated that they appear.
Certain factions seem to feel that no cost is too high. I would ask
them this: "Would you spend $1,000,000 to save an entire species of
animal? Most of us would answer "yes".
Okay then, what about one individual animal. Fewer would say "yes".
What about a tree, or a small plant. Is $1,000,000 worth it?
Food for thought...
- Prev by Date: Re: Taken from the MSNBC front page OH BROTHER
- Next by Date: Re: OT The Storm
- Previous by thread: Re: O/T: Opinion AKA: LipStick On A Pig
- Next by thread: Re: O/T: Opinion AKA: LipStick On A Pig