Obama Plan To "Bankrupt" Clean Coal Would Cost Hundreds of Thousands Of Jobs says Western business roundtable


Business Coalition Calls On Other Politicians To Distance Themselves

Denver, CO (Nov. 3, 2008) -- A bipartisan coalition of business leaders is calling on Governors, state legislators and Members of Congress publicly express their opposition before tomorrow's election to proposals to "bankrupt" the U.S. coal industry and threaten to put out of work several hundred thousand Americans who work in coal-related industries.

The call was issued by the Western Business Roundtable following news reports that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama intends to make it so costly to build advanced clean coal power plants with carbon capture and sequestration that it will "bankrupt" any company that tries to do so.

"We are calling upon Democrats, Republicans and Independents from coast to coast to publicly express their support for advanced clean coal power generation and to distance themselves from those who say that we should bankrupt the coal industry," said Britt Weygandt, Executive Director of the Western Business Roundtable. "A lot of Americans are going to be listening in the next 24 hours to see which elected leaders stand up for clean coal and which don't."

Obama's comments regarding coal were made during an interview with the San Francisco Examiner earlier this year, and is available in streaming audio form here.


In the interview, Obama says the following:

"Let me sort of describe my overall policy. What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there. I was the first to call for a 100 percent auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted. That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.  The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it. So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them."

Weygandt said: "Regardless of the outcome of tomorrow's election, elected officials at all levels need to stand up for a robust clean coal coal option for America," Weygandt said. "They should stand up for affordable and reliable electricity, for a stable and reliable grid, and for the hundreds of thousands of American workers in this industry."

No votes yet

The way I see it, there are two options.

1) Obama loses which will apparently start riots on November 5th


2) Obama wins, which means higher prices for energy, oil, food, healthcare etc etc. The riots of starving, out of work people will start sometime in the first few months of 2009.

I have never owned a gun but I now feel I must prepare myself for the coming meltdown. What would be the best firearm to purchase to protect my family and myself?

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

For the novice gunman, the shotgun is the best choice.

They're plentiful. Their ammo is similarly plentiful. You can easily load non-lethal or less-lethal rounds (yes, seriously.). A shotgun is just about the only effective projectile weapon in the hands of a novice, since it provides a scatter of shot. Racking that shotgun invokes a sound that usually tells your opponents what you have and that you now mean business. Defending your home with a shotgun is about as close to red-blooded Americanism that you can get.

Get a cheap single-barrel shotgun in 12-gauge either new, at a gun show, or used from individual sale (the preferred choice). Buy several boxes of 12-gauge rounds of simple buckshot. Buy a box of birdshot in case you feel like making your opponents run and then end up picking BBs out of their asses later. Buy some range time at Cleland's or other outlets that allow shotgun, and fire off a box until you feel comfortable with lighting off Ol' Bessie.

Then take it home and hope you'll never actually have to brandish it, and if you have to brandish it, that you won't have to fire it. But make no mistake ... once you're under threat and that weapon is in your hands, you are bound by duty to fire it if the circumstances require it. Is some punk pointing a pistol at you? Sorry, but YOU MUST SHOOT HIM. In any security situation, anyone who points a gun at you must be considered hostile and about to fire. FIRE FIRST. Hopefully your opponent will survive and learn from his experience.

In case anyone's wondering, I don't have a shotgun. Among a variety of useful pistols with large-capacity clips, I have a Spanish .308 CETME battle rifle ... with which a 200-yard kill is not that uncertain. That's well out of range of the punks with their pistols, even shotguns. DON'T RIOT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.

We'll be hanging out at the back of the house though, just in case there's any crossfire, ok?

Don't worry. If there's ANY crossfire, there won't be by the time I fire my 3rd shot. :^) Mobs aren't known for their courage by the time the 3rd red mist sprays over bystanders.

I do.

The Browning over and under turned out to be the best insurance against unwelcome visitors a man could hope for.

If the top barrel doesn't get 'em, the bottom one will.

Obama's ideas on coal will just devastate southeastern Ohio. What an absolute maroon!

Liberals are always bad for the Midwest. Their wacko environmental polices will destroy Detroit and the Big 3. They want to dismantle the coal industry, killing Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania.

With a tax increase -- no matter who it is on -- it will take money out of Ohio and send it to DC where they know so much better than we how to spend it.

Why liberals feel that they have to take from the "works" and give to the "work nots" is beyond me. But I fear that is what we are in store for: at least four years of subsidizing those who refuse to work.

 when   they occur.   The closing of these plants and companies will be blamed on Bush.  

Screw Obama. GuestZero's "idea on coal" is that there MUST be some way to scrub the stacks or otherwise minimize carbon emissions. We're sitting on 300 years worth of energy usage in the Alleghenies. We CAN'T afford to just sit on it all and claim there's no way to use it fairly cleanly.

Pink Slip
A "threat to our political system"

Pink Slip

McCain and Obama have nearly identical coal plans...

Defeat smells like desperation...

When people start barcading themselves and start spraying rounds, consider this;

Man Kills 12-Year-Old Trick-or-Treater with AK-47

SUMTER, S.C. (AP) — An ex-convict who thought he was being robbed gunned down a 12-year-old trick-or-treater, spraying nearly 30 rounds with an assault rifle from inside his home after hearing a knock on the door, police said Saturday.

Quentin Patrick, 22, is accused of killing 12-year-old T.J. Darrisaw on Friday night. T.J.’s 9-year-old brother, Ahmadre Darrisaw, and their father, Freddie Grinnell, were injured but were released after being treated at a hospital.


There's a big difference between THIS:

Responsible man defending his home and neighborhood from rioters.

... and THIS:

Idiot with a gun who can't determine a child is not a threat.

I love how we self-defense types are maligned by Liberals as being people who "spray" bullets, as if we're indiscriminate and wholly irresponsible. Of course, the Second Amendment is still in full force in the USA, Ohio and Toledo in particular. Blanket pre-decisions on OUR competency is not within YOUR rights, NC.

You dinged yourself, I didn't, did I?

Did I say anything about you or your rights?

I don't see anything directly related to you or any thing maligning anyone.

It's all your in you, I did not right anything about anyone, did I?

The reactions are like shooting off a weapon for no apparent reason, in this case it is words.

Maybe if there was thought in the chamber and not hollow rants, the comments would mean more.

Oho! Just thought you'd comment about some random shooting event, eh? The original sin here must have therefore been your non sequitur.

1) "An ex-convict" owning a gun is a federal crime
"A Federal law, known as the felon-in-possession law, makes it a crime for those who have been convicted of serious offenses to own a firearm."

2) "spraying rounds" can fall under:
a) assault with intent to kill
b) assault with a dangerous weapon

3) "It is unlawful for a person to present or point at another person a loaded or unloaded firearm. "

Now once again. If a person is so unstable that they are willing to commit the crime of murder, try and kill trick-or-treaters, and break a host of other laws, why would they care if it was illegal to own a gun?

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

You don't strike me as competent on many levels, except ranting and raving.

Luckily again you have no power to judge my competency. Like I said, that's not within your rights. Remember, keeping and bearing arms in the USA is still NOT AGAINST THE LAW.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.