Gore backs Obama for presidency
Tuesday, June 17, 2008 5:12 UK
By Jonathan Beale
BBC News, Washington
The former US Vice-President, Al Gore, has made his debut on the presidential election campaign by endorsing the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama.
In a speech at a rally in Detroit, Michigan, Mr Gore urged all Democrats to unite behind the party's ticket.
He said Mr Obama was the man to bring about change after "eight years of incompetence, neglect and failure".
Mr Gore, the beaten Democratic candidate in the 2000, avoided taking sides throughout the primary season.
But now that Hillary Clinton has suspended her campaign, Mr Gore has added his weight to Mr Obama.
'We need change'
The impact of Mr Gore's support for the Illinois senator would have been more significant had he done it before the Democratic nomination contest was decided.
But he chose to remain on the sidelines throughout the primaries as Mr Obama battled it out with Mrs Clinton.
Nevertheless, Mr Gore remains a powerful voice in the Democratic Party and his appearance on the stage with Mr Obama will help unite Democrats for the general election in November.
He was former President Bill Clinton's deputy and almost won the White House when he ran against President George W Bush in 2000.
His reputation has been enhanced in recent years by leading an international campaign on climate change.
Addressing the rally at the Joe Louis Arena in Detroit, Mr Gore likened Mr Obama to former President John F Kennedy as a young leader who inspired.
"After eight years of incompetence, neglect and failure, we need change," he said. "After eight years when our constitution has been dishonoured and disrespected, we need changes."
Mr Gore also praised his stance in opposing the Iraq war.
Mr Obama said this endorsement meant a lot because Mr Gore was a visionary not just for the Democrats, but for the country as a whole.
Another big endorsement for Obama. I know -- this is a former Democrat President and Senator backing a Democrat Senator running for President... big deal right?
However, I think Gore carries with him a big subset of the people that will be voting in November. Namely, I'm talking about the "Young Vote" -- first time voters, second time voters, who possibly agree with a lot of the suggestions he made in the past about improving and repairing the environment. There are many that are both Republican and Democrat -- (most of the voters that I'm talking about are the "Independents") who took into consideration and maybe found at least some useful and insightful information in his environmental agendas.
It's probably not a big enough group of voters to have any impact in the big picture of the election, but sometimes it comes down to a few votes (recent past has shown).
So then I look back on Obama's environmental and energy agenda or policy and found the following:
"The truth is, our energy problem has become an energy crisis because no matter how well-intentioned the promise — no matter how bold the proposal — they all fall victim to the same Washington politics that has only become more divided and dishonest; more timid and calculating; more beholden to the powerful interests that have the biggest stake in the status quo.... We cannot afford more of the same timid politics when the future of our planet is at stake. Global warming is not a someday problem, it is now."
—Barack Obama, Oct. 8, 2007
Sen. Barack Obama has made an aggressive carbon cap-and-trade program the centerpiece of his energy and environmental agenda. He intends to raise $150 billion over 10 years from the auctioning of carbon pollution credits, and using the money to fund a variety of initiatives to boost energy efficiency, new alternative energy sources and fuels, and the revolutionizing of the American auto industry.
Obama earned the endorsement of the League of Conservation Voters in his bid for the Senate.
The LCV Scorecard rates politicians on a scale of 0 to 100 based on their votes on environmental issues on which the group has taken a position. He scored 95 and 100 in his two terms in the Senate.
The 2008 Obama campaign has taken $94,278 from the oil and gas industry, ranking him 6th of 15 candidates and 3rd of seven Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Barack Obama's Energy and Environmental Platform at a Glance
These points are derived from Barack Obama's speeches, public comments and the energy and environmental policies outlined on his campaign Website.
CLIMATE
* Cut carbon dioxide emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Employ a cap-and-trade system whereby companies would have to restrict pollution to within a national cap, and those that pollute less could sell credits to those who pollute more. Auction all credits.
* Create the Global Energy Forum — modeled on the G8+5, which included all G-8 members plus Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa — to focus on global energy and environmental issues, including first global warming. Ultimately merge efforts with the United Nations on climate change.
* Develop domestic and international incentives for forest conservation.
ENERGY
* Spend $150 billion over 10 years on biofuels and biofuel infrastructure, plug-in hybrid, renewable energy, low-emission coal plants and a digital electric grid.
* Create an independent, private Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund, with $10 billion for five years, to fund technology development. This fund will partner with existing investment funds and our national laboratories to finance new energy technologies.
* Double, to $6 billion, clean energy research and development.
* Expand the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program's weatherization grants, and establish a new dedicated fund to assist low-income Americans afford the higher energy bills that will come with a transition to new energy sources.
* Invest unspecified amount in workforce training and transition to jobs in the renewable and alternative energy sector, including a program directed at low-income youth.
* Use nuclear after looking into future solutions to "four key issues: public right-to-know, security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation."
* 25% renewable energy portfolio by 2025, and 30% of federal government by 2020.
* Order Department of Energy to update appliance efficiency standards.
* Mandate that all new federal buildings built after 2025 will be zero emission buildings. Make all new federal buildings 40% more efficient in five years, and make existing building 25% more efficient in five years.
* Set goal that all new buildings — federal or not — are zero emissions by 2030, and that the efficiency of existing buildings be boosted by 25%, and new buildings by 50%, in 10 years.
* Create a competitive grant program to fund local energy efficiency projects.
* Provide grants and other incentives to encourage states to change the way energy companies earn profits, so that reducing energy demand has as much economic value as supplying increased demand.
* End the use of incandescent bulbs by 2014.
AUTOMOBILES
* Increase use of corn ethanol to 60 billion gallons by 2030, invest in cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, and support the building of locally owned ethanol refineries.
* Buy all flex-fuel federal vehicles that can run on E85, a blend of 15% gasoline and 85% ethanol, and mandate that all new cars made in America be flex-fuel by 2013.
* Double fuel economy of U.S. vehicles in 18 years by raising mileage requirements 4%, or about 1 mpg, per year. Offer "generous" tax incentives to automakers to modernize plants, and make standards vary by vehicle class.
* Establish a low-carbon fuel standard to reduce carbon 1% a year from 2010 to 2020.
* Expand tax incentives for car buyers who want to buy hybrids and other fuel-efficient vehicles by lifting the 60,000-per-manufacturer cap on buyer tax credits.
OTHER
* Reform transportation funding and to make states consider energy efficiency in all transportation decisions, to encourage so-called "smart growth" transit-oriented developments that discourage suburban sprawl by building in existing cities and town centers, where there is less need to drive a car because home, work, recreation and school are nearby.
* Reform employer tax credits to "level playing field" for mass transit, which currently gets half the credit as a parking space.
* Reverse many Bush Administration executive orders and regulations related to the environment, including "$2 billion in cuts to conservation programs."
* Increase conservation measures for the Great Lakes
* Renew industry tax that had paid for toxic waste site cleanups when the polluter can not be identified or cannot afford the cleanup.
* Increase funding for National Parks and Wildlife Refuges
* Tighten regulations on factory farms
* Oppose energy exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Sources:
* League of Conservation Voters
* The Heat Is On, a partnership project of the LCV Education Fund
* Grist
* Barack Obama's Campaign Website
* Center for Responsive Politics
Last edited by mmcd3182; 06-17-2008 at 01:58 AM.
Life is something that you can't control.
When you try to hold on to it, it makes you let go!
The following member(s) say Thank You to mmcd3182 for this post:
"Kiss of death?"... All Obama needed was another screaming liberal endorsement such as Howard Dean, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, Dennich Kuninich, Chris Dodd, Jimmy Carter, Dick Durbin, Henry Waxman, William Jefferson, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Maxine Waters, Jerrold ......and the many ridiculous pinheads in Hollywood....It's not a list of people who I would enjoy their association or support, it would convince me I'd done something wrong
"Kiss of death?"... All Obama needed was another screaming liberal endorsement such as Howard Dean, Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, Dennich Kuninich, Chris Dodd, Jimmy Carter, Dick Durbin, Henry Waxman, William Jefferson, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Maxine Waters, Jerrold ......and the many ridiculous pinheads in Hollywood....It's not a list of people who I would enjoy their association or support, it would convince me I'd done something wrong
Well of course you, being a Republican, would not consider their support -- Obama's a democrat... lol
What about his Economic / Energy policy? Did you read the second half... everything look good?
Last edited by mmcd3182; 06-17-2008 at 14:20 PM.
Life is something that you can't control.
When you try to hold on to it, it makes you let go!
Increase in corn ethanol is a loser already, if every acre of corn we produce in a normal year would be made into ethanol, it would only replace 15% of our gas requirements.......It's already disrupted our food supply terribly.....Spending increases are astronomical in Obama's plans.......There's no need to mention Iraq, because it's going to begin to pay off and we're going to be there even if he's president.....Increased oil drilling is necessary because alternative sources of energy can't replace the sheer volume we require to exist.....Most of the proposed alternatives should be used but it's going to require everything we can come up with.....Replacing fossil fuels will take decades, and we'll have to depend on them until alternatives can catch up.....To our credit, energy conservation seems to be happening......
Increase in corn ethanol is a loser already, if every acre of corn we produce in a normal year would be made into ethanol, it would only replace 15% of our gas requirements.......It's already disrupted our food supply terribly.....Spending increases are astronomical in Obama's plans.......There's no need to mention Iraq, because it's going to begin to pay off and we're going to be there even if he's president.....Increased oil drilling is necessary because alternative sources of energy can't replace the sheer volume we require to exist.....Most of the proposed alternatives should be used but it's going to require everything we can come up with.....Replacing fossil fuels will take decades, and we'll have to depend on them until alternatives can catch up.....To our credit, energy conservation seems to be happening......
Well, you drive prices to where they are now and people are going to be sitting at home a lot more than they used to.
I hope they don't use the old "Supply / Demand" "reason" to explain the price of gas anymore. Demand has gone DOWN -- people are driving so much less than they were before. If demand has gone down -- why aren't prices following? In fact, why are they doing the OPPOSITE of what basic economics tells us -- prices going up while demand is going down??? makes no sense...
At least we don't have the $10 a gallon that some places in Europe have... then again, we don't have the public transit systems that they have.
Life is something that you can't control.
When you try to hold on to it, it makes you let go!
The following member(s) say Thank You to mmcd3182 for this post:
Fuel prices may never come down because we're in a world market; China and India are the major countries increasing their need and use of energy but all modern societies are experiencing food and energy shortages.
Decreasing oil supplies and reserves are certainly a primary cause of higher prices and increased manufacturing and industrialization in many countries as they attempt to raise their standard of living, is resulting in competition for food and energy.
There may be short periods of cheaper gas but all they will serve to do is blind us to our goal of strict conservation and discovering many alternative sources of energy.
We'll need everyone of them to replace the tremendous volume supplied by fossil fuels......I'm not sure I've heard anyone who seems to be as concerned as they should be.
Lower income people in all countries will suffer the most of course.
There will be considerable posturing and blaming by political candidates and parties but this situation is all of our fault because we've been warned for decades.
Since we are the "Saudi Arabia" of coal, finding clean environmental ways to use coal is an urgent priority.
Last edited by saddlebum; 06-17-2008 at 22:06 PM.
"kinder, gentler"
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to saddlebum For This Useful Post:
I hope they don't use the old "Supply / Demand" "reason" to explain the price of gas anymore. Demand has gone DOWN -- people are driving so much less than they were before. If demand has gone down -- why aren't prices following?
The old supply and demand argument...you mean...ECONOMICS?
People have not decreased their demand significantly as measured by the amount of gas that is sold every week. Additionally, the speculation in oil futures keeps rising and will continue to rise until there is some increase in supply.
Lucky for us Americans, the "big bad oil companies" are investing some of their "ill gotten revenue" into developing new platforms in the Gulf of Mexico which will increase our oil production by up to 13% this year. Additionally, those evil SOBs are opening the first new refinery since the 1970s in the Dakotas. If ANWR was opened up today, the price of gas would drop $1.50 overnight.
Man, I'm sure glad that those evil oil companies who want nothing but every cent we have are investing in ways to lower the price of gas, since high gas prices will eventually negatively affect their own bottom line and aren't in their best interest.
Now, if we could only convince the government to stop screwing around with the economy (10% ethanol in every gallon of gas even though it gets less MPG and is worse for the environment and has raised food prices significantly), we might just be able to get this situation squared away.
---
As for Gore, the man has a vested financial interest in continuing environmental hysteria and cast a deciding vote on early ethanol funding even though he owned stock in a company that was to be substantially impacted by the vote and did not recuse himself.
Last edited by demopolite; 06-18-2008 at 10:18 AM.
Oh how we danced and we swallowed the nights for it was all ripe for dreaming
Oh how we danced away all of the lights we've always been out of our minds
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to demopolite For This Useful Post:
"kinder, gentler"
