Transterrestrial Musings




Defend Free Speech!


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay




Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type 4.0
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Ouch | Main | When The Power Went Out »

Obama's Ethanol

If ethanol is so great, why doesn't he support its importation from Brazil? Surely it's not because he's in the pocket of ADM?

ADM is based in Illinois, the second-largest corn-producing state. Not long after arriving in the U.S. Senate, Obama flew twice on corporate jets owned by the nation's largest ethanol producer. Imagine if McCain flew on the corporate jets of Exxon Mobil.


Corn-based ethanol gets a 51-cents-a-gallon tax subsidy that will cost taxpayers $4.5 billion this year. McCain opposes ethanol subsidies while Obama supports them. McCain opposed them even though Iowa is the first caucus state. Obama, touted by Caroline Kennedy as another JFK, was no profile in courage in Iowa.

...Last year, as President Bush was about to sign an energy cooperation agreement with Brazil, Obama said the move would hurt "our country's drive toward energy independence."

Really? The only thing it might hurt is Obama's drive to the White House.

Must be that new politics. You know, "change"?

And it's also amusing to note that the Democrats don't want to wait for drilling to pay off, but they're perfectly happy to wait for switch grass.

[Mid-morning update]

Further thoughts:

If it's intended to cut the nation's energy bill, Obama's ethanol policy makes no sense, if it's intended to secure the nation's energy supplies, Obama's ethanol policy makes no sense, if it's designed to improve the nation's relationship with a major Latin American trading partner, Obama's ethanol policy makes no sense, but, if, on the other hand, it's just another example of good old porkbarrel politics, Obama's ethanol policy makes a great deal of sense.
 
 

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Obama's Ethanol.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.transterrestrial.com/admin/mt-tb.cgi/9781

5 Comments

Josh Reiter wrote:

"Democrats don't want to wait for drilling to pay off, but they're perfectly happy to wait for switch grass."

Heh, good one. I like that.

Yet Another Drooling Moron wrote:

Yes, Josh, that makes sense. We don't have 25% of the world's oil nor will we ever. We can on the other hand grow switch grass in abundance; something Bush's Saudi goat fuc*ers can't do in the sand.

Idiot. Think a little bit before you clap for the moron.

Karl Hallowell wrote:

We can on the other hand grow switch grass in abundance; something Bush's Saudi goat fuc*ers can't do in the sand.

But what's the hurry, right? Let's help ADM make a little profit, just a few billion here and there, first. That's what "waiting for switch grass" means.

Bill Maron wrote:

YADM is so stupid. What land do we take out of food production to grow the grass? Do we divert water to irrigate it? Do we cut down forests to grow it? I've opened doors smarter than you.

Andy Freeman wrote:

> We don't have 25% of the world's oil nor will we ever.

We have 25% of the world's coal.

And, if you count the recoverable oil sands, we're not far from 25%.

FWIW, we don't have 25% of the world's switch grass or arable land. (Mexico actually has more usable farm land than the US.)

Leave a comment

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.
 

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on June 26, 2008 5:11 AM.

Ouch was the previous entry in this blog.

When The Power Went Out is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.1