[turnpike boy]

Since you seemingly missed the point (the subject ain't about COAL), it's about leading, from the front and NOT with mandates and empty rhetoric. But I'll play along. You - like Obama - tell us coal has to go. OK, no problem - what do you propose to replace it with?

Obama intends to supertax conventional coal plants, and simply overtax clean coal plants. He's on record with this. He stated anybody wants to build coal-fired gen plants, go ahead, but you'll be bankrupted by fees and regs and administration costs. Oh, boy, I can't wait to get started on providing for the needs of this society, never mind the economy.

OK, then, Mr. Obama, should we just stand still until you manage to come up with an operating, economically-viable alternative? No more new housing, including low-income mandates; no more industrial expansion, for new jobs; no more new/renovated development, for jobs/increased mobility efficiency/increased world competitiveness/material improvements to living standards.

Time to come clean, Ernie. This proposal is so far beyond a loser that it is impossible to take with any degree of integrity - it is pure pie-in-the-sky, academic chickensh*t. Totally, utterly bereft of any dimension of practicality - and worse, totally, utterly absent of any tangible proposal for substitution. In other words, a loser.

The focus is REALITY, Ernie, not coal. Coal is only the latest rhetorical demon this shill has thrown out; taxes and programs and societial engineering are but a few of the others. He gives NOTHING concrete in replacement; he offers NOTHING demonstrable and do-able. NOTHING but words.

Show me the alternatives. That is all I've said, last post and this one. Show me the alternatives. Because until you do, then threatening the existence of the technologies we have with bankruptcy is just pure chickensh*t.

You're right - sheesh, we're going nowhere with dialogue. But then, substance has never been his strong suit.


-Roger