All morning long I've been researching lots of sites regarding McSame's Energy Policy, called the Lexington Project in an effort to intelligently answer an email from my brother-in-law who says that Obama's plan (frankly, I don't think he even read it) is "fluff", "political speak", and is not as detailed or realistic as McSame's. My B-I-L doesn't give specifics on why he labels Obama's plan in the way he does. He just throws that BS out there in an attempt to sound "cool."
Anyway, in going from one site to another, I stumbled upon a piece, critical of McCain's Energy Policies, and written by Laura Meckler of the Wall Street Journal: Senator's Broad Range Of Energy Policies Defies Categories. [Couldn't find it diaried]
I've quoted paragraphs 2 thru 5, but the entire piece is worth a read.
WSJ - Senator's Broad Range Of Energy Policies Defies Categories.
He is for more oil drilling and also for alternatives to oil. He wants to drill off the coasts but not in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. He supports subsidies for nuclear power and clean-coal technology, but has opposed them for ethanol, solar and wind power.
He wants to lower gasoline prices by temporarily suspending the federal gas tax. But he wants to raise the price of gas with a cap-and-trade system that punishes polluting industries.
In environmentally conscious Portland, Ore., he praised wind power. In Texas oil country he supported more drilling. In rural Missouri he urged more nuclear power. In California he praised fuel-efficiency standards.
"It's all over the map," said Bob Ebel, a senior adviser and energy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I'm just sort of scratching my head."
And because the thought that only my B-I-L would see my email, after all the time I spent constructing it, I've decided to subject everyone else to it as well :
Well, since you've read BOTH plans, maybe you can tell me what you like about McCain's plan as opposed to Obama's? You say that Obama's plan is "alot of fluff" and "political speak" but you don't say WHY or go into any detail. What do you see in McCain's plan that is better than Obama's?
You also say that Obama's plan is not as "detailed"? If pages count for details, Obama's beats McCain by about 3 pages.
Let me ask you this about McCain's "encouragement" of the "Market" to develop alternative sources of energy. What the heck does he mean by this?:
To develop these and other sources of renewable energy will require that we rationalize the current patchwork of temporary tax credits that provide commercial feasibility. John McCain believes in an even-handed system of tax credits that will remain in place until the market transforms sufficiently to the point where renewable energy no longer merits the taxpayers' dollars.
The Wall Street Journal (hardly a bastion of left-wing opinion) wrote an article about McCain's Energies policies and basically said that he's all over the map, and defies categories, giving numerous examples. An expert from the DC think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) says:
"It’s all over the map," said Bob Ebel, a senior adviser and energy expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I’m just sort of scratching my head."
McCain is a proponent of nuclear power plants and supports dumping waste at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, but he's against the idea of having the waste material driven through Arizona. [YouTube video] Obama is not specifically against the idea of nuclear power. He just more thoughtful about the consequences -- public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation. He is against waste dumping at Yucca Mountain. For what it's worth, I'm completely against nuclear power plants. There's NO way you can build, AND open for business, 45 power plants 22 years. That's unrealistic. Finally, in regards to his plan for nuclear power plants? Well, he'd leave the decision up to the states on whether they want them or not.
Now, this is only a little of why I dislike McCain's plan (I'll add that it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that he'll continue with tax breaks for major corporations).
Hope you'll debate this with me, by addressing some specifics of why you think McCain's plan is better for America than Obama's. Debate me on the points I've raised and sourced. Otherwise, I'm beginning to think that you're only voting for McCain because he's a Republican, not because he has better ideas. And if this works, maybe we can move the discussion to the most important one for me: Healthcare.
Ta ta for now,
Terre
As I was typing this diary, I just received his reply:
Ok...the time has come for me to respectfully concede...I cannot hang with your stuff. You are amazingly proficient in the realm of political debate. I am out of my league here, but if you ever want to debate religion, the Bible, Judaism/Christianity/Islam...I'm your guy. Yes, I am voting for McCain because A) he is a Republican, and B) He most closely represents the values that I embrace. You never answered my question about helping us canvass neighborhoods for McCain this weekend...
My reply will be:
Thanks sweetie, but NO THANKS!
Thank goodness his wife, my sister, will offset his vote (so I've been told by my niece) with one for Obama.