Hillary announces her plans for energy independence

[red states rule]

When the Red Queen anncunced her "energy plan" , it was all more subsidies and threats to the oil companies

Nothing new here folks


Sen. Clinton calls for civic responsibility

By Shir Haberman
shaberman@seacoastonline.com
July 24, 2007 7:09 PM
PORTSMOUTH — Sen. Hillary Clinton challenged Americans to take the same attitude as those who fought and lived through World War II when it comes to achieving energy self-sufficiency and ending global warming.

Clinton, speaking in a public forum at Seacoast Media Group, noted that those who have become known as the "Greatest Generation" sacrificed not only on the battlefield in World War II and later in Korea, but in their daily lives to achieve success. While she said she preferred to call the changes Americans should make to achieve energy independence and end global warming "taking responsibility" rather than making sacrifices, she said the attitude can be the same.


During the visit to Portsmouth, Clinton also announced a new feature of her plan to address global warming: the Green Building Fund.

Through the fund, the federal government would allocate $1 billion annually to states to make grants or low-interest loans to improve energy efficiency in public buildings, such as schools, police stations, firehouses and offices, Clinton said.

The Green Building Fund will create thousands of new "green collar" jobs, Clinton said.

"This is a moment of profound change and challenge for our nation," Clinton said. "Energy efficiency is the cheapest, cleanest, fastest technology we have to cut energy use and reduce emissions. "If we do this right, it can be a win-win for our economy and our environment," the senator said.

Clinton congratulated Portsmouth Mayor Steve Marchand, who was in the audience, on the strides the city has made in energy conservation, citing the "green" certification received by the new library and the push to construct an energy-efficient fire station. She also spoke of the efforts by Public Service of New Hampshire in creating a wood-burning power plant at Schiller Station and those of the town of Eliot, Maine, for working toward using wind to power town buildings.

However, the senator also noted that despite all these local and state initiatives, pollution from other parts of the country makes its way into the state, affecting its air and natural resources.

"At the same time New Hampshire is taking steps (to minimize energy usage and the production of greenhouse gases) at the local and state levels, it is suffering from what's happening nationally," she said.

The leading Democratic presidential candidate said it was her opinion that any energy policy needs to deal with three issues: minimizing reliance on non-renewable energy resources supplied by nations that are not friendly to the United States, attacking global warming, and ending environmentally created health problems.

"These are inter-related issues," she told the crowd of more than 200 people who filled the press room of the Portsmouth Herald's parent company. "We have to remember this."

The centerpiece of Clinton's energy proposals is a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund she wants to establish to fund alternative energy initiatives. The initial investment in the fund would come primarily from the oil companies that she said have been thwarting efforts to change American energy policies.

Ten billion dollars would come from charging oil companies a fee for drilling on public property; $20 billion would come from removing current oil company subsidies; and the remaining $20 billion would come from "a deal" Clinton said she would offer the major oil companies.

"We've been reading about refineries shutting down," she said. "It's intriguing to me that it seems the refineries always shut down in the summer time.

"So, here's the deal. (The oil companies) can invest the $20 billion themselves in the development of alternative fuels or rebuilding refineries, or we will tax their windfall profits."

Clinton said she can already see the "crocodile tears" on the faces of oil executives and them saying that she is going after the oil companies.

"I am going after the oil companies, and I think for good reason," Clinton said. "They have been a big part of the problem and refused to be part of the solution."

The federal government must put new technologies developed using fund money on a fast track and develop a global warming initiative, Clinton said, which will open a "new era of innovations" that she likened to the technological boom created by the development of the Internet. She called these new technological initiatives "Energy 2.0."

"I want kids to be as excited about this as Bill Gates was about computers," Clinton said. "I'm not sure we know today what forms of energy we'll be using in 50 years, and I'm excited about that."


http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070724/NEWS/70724010/-1/NEWS09&sfad=1

[preservanation]

I would like to announce America's plan for Hillary independence.
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers form the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

[Saigio]

You guys must be really scared of her doing something that will benefit this country

[Truth_and_Power]

Without the need for foreign oil, there would be no reason for war. This scares neocons who are attached to the idea.

[Saigio]

Without the need for foreign oil, there would be no reason for war. This scares neocons who are attached to the idea.


It's time to get them off the bottle of war. It's time they grow up.

[ViolaLee]

Sounds like a good energy plan.

RSR and Preserva, why don't you want to conserve energy and find alternatives to oil?

[micfranklin]

It sounds like a good energy plan to me, although I can't help but feel as though there's a string attached....

[preservanation]

While she said she preferred to call the changes Americans should make to achieve energy independence and end global warming "taking responsibility" rather than making sacrifices, she said the attitude can be the same.First off, her solutions are socialist solutions and second she is basing it on the hoax and fear mongering of man made global warming.
"This is a moment of profound change and challenge for our nation," Clinton said.Yup.
She also spoke of the efforts by Public Service of New Hampshire in creating a wood-burning power plantShe'll have to get by all the greens tied to trees and blocking lumber cutters and the like.
Ten billion dollars would come from charging oil companies a fee for drilling on public property; $20 billion would come from removing current oil company subsidies; and the remaining $20 billion would come from "a deal" Clinton said she would offer the major oil companies.Huge money and power grab. This is unconstitutional and socialist on it's surface, and fascist at it's core.
A "deal" like the Corleones make a "deal" An Offer They Can't Refuse.
The centerpiece of Clinton's energy proposals is a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund she wants to establish to fund alternative energy initiatives. The initial investment in the fund would come primarily from the oil companies that she said have been thwarting efforts to change American energy policies.This entails "Taking profits from oil companies. Nice.
More like a $50 billion Strategic Clinton Reelection Fund. Hoooo Boy.
"I am going after the oil companies, and I think for good reason," Clinton said. "They have been a big part of the problem and refused to be part of the solution."This is chilling for America.
I never thought I would see a candidate run on the fascist dictator ticket in my life time.
What's next, the media?
Chilling.
"So, here's the deal. (The oil companies) can invest the $20 billion themselves in the development of alternative fuels or rebuilding refineries, or we will tax their windfall profits."Ah, here comes the threats!
This should scare every free American!
And it goes on.
For being so smart, she has no idea what America is or stands for.
Say good by to our nation as we know it if she is elected.
Alinsky taught her well.

[tony mitra]

It is my understanding, having watched Ms Clinton for a while, that she has a good chance of steamrolling the opposition.

As to making USA energy independent, I shall lay bet that she will not be able to achieve that by making minor changes in policy like the ones she talks about. However, she is an astute observer of public moods, and will say things, and might even do what she says, in order to secure her position in the ballots.

The reason all those taxes to the oil companies will not make much of a difference, and I believe Ms Clinton is well aware of the statistics, is that it will take far greater measures, where more than oil corporations will have to bear the brunt, namely, the average electorate. And that is something no politicians wants to talk about, and Ms Clinton is no exception.

So, if she wins, and does what she said she will do, and then the energy independence does not come about, and I am certain it will not come about by doing those things alone, what will Ms Clinton do or say in way of an explanation? With no disrespect to her (she is really no different than the others as a politician, only smarter and tougher personally), she will find someone, or something, else, to put the blame on.

Eventually, when an average American begins to hurt in the pocket, and the nation is hopping mad about it all, will perhaps a new generation of politicians emerge who are willing to call a spade a spade, instead of calling it a cuckoo clock.

That, however, is just my take on the issue.

Cheers and have a great weekend, everyone.
:)

[Wndrtch]

Without the need for foreign oil, there would be no reason for war. This scares neocons who are attached to the idea.


Kill, KILL, I want to KILL!!! :drool:

Oh Please! Mankind has never been without a reason to wage war. Ever hear of religion? I think that was around before oil.

Besides, don't you think the deaths of 3,000 Americans is a VALID reason for war? At Pearl Harbor, we only lost some 2,000, and most of these were military lives, not civilians. We entered two wars, "invaded" several nations, and dropped two atomic bombs.

[Wndrtch]

I would like to announce America's plan for Hillary independence.
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers form the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.


GOOD FORM!!! :clapper::worship:

[Elrathin]

It really amazes me to see conservatives sticking with other conservatives with extreme views. Sorry But that is NOT in good form and it is not realistic. No matter how much you may hate Hillary.

It is about equivalent as calling Bush A Fascist. When will people on the exteme sides learn noone as a whole wants your views.

[preservanation]

Only here can posting the Declaration of Independence be categorized as having extreme views!
LOL
As for Hillary, there is too much evidence that she has no regard for the laws of this land. Her ideology runs counter to our founding principals and our desire for individual freedom from the tyranny of evil men and women.

[Elrathin]

Only here can posting the Declaration of Independence be categorized as having extreme views!
LOL
As for Hillary, there is too much evidence that she has no regard for the laws of this land. Her ideology runs counter to our founding principals and our desire for individual freedom from the tyranny of evil men and women.


No posting the Declaration of Independence is not extreme, but acting like Hillary doesn't follow it IS. You know what you were doing.

As for laws, hasn't Bush created the mose government friendly laws in the past few years? I would call that tyranny over Hillary.

[preservanation]

We will disagree.
Hillary's... long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism......are actually real and not some vague accusations with no proof or substance heaped upon Bush on a daily basis.
Poe Writes:HILLARY'S SECRET WAR (Exerpts)
The plan to silence
Internet journalists

Posted: July 6, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Editor's note: The following is an eye-opening look into New York Times best-selling author Richard Poe's revealing book, "Hillary's Secret War." Whereas Edward Klein's book on the New York senator reveals previously unknown aspects of her personal life, Poe's expose focuses on how Hillary Clinton and the left's "shadow government" have labored to put her and her far-left agenda in the White House by controlling the still-uncensored flow of real news to Americans – via the Internet.
If that sounds too fantastic to be true, read on.



On Feb. 11, 1998, Hillary Clinton told reporters that the Internet needed an "editing" or "gatekeeping" function. The World Wide Web was out of control, she said. It needed to be reined in. Five years later, Hillary's dream is on the verge of being realized.


The simple answer is that we failed to treat the Clinton threat as seriously as we once treated the Nixon threat. Nixon's abuses were aggressively investigated and punished. The Clintons' abuses were swept under the carpet.

Nixon's political machine evaporated following his resignation. The Clinton machine has only grown stronger with each passing year. Today, the Clintons effectively control the Democratic Party. The McCain-Feingold Act is largely their handiwork.

"[M]ost people are afraid of invoking the wrath of Hillary Clinton, and so they will talk about her only on condition of anonymity ..." author Edward Klein recently told the National Review. "Like Nixon, Hillary is paranoid and has an enemies list. Like Nixon, Hillary has used FBI files against her enemies. Like Nixon, Hillary believes the ends justify the means. Like Nixon, Hillary has a penchant for doing illegal things."

The heroes of the Clinton drama did not succeed in forcing their adversaries from office. But they saved America – at least temporarily – from a 16-year Clinton co-presidency. Hillary Clinton was registered with the FEC as a presidential candidate for the 2000 race. The outpouring of Clinton scandal coverage from Fox News, talk radio and the Internet forced her to back down from this plan.

Today, as Mrs. Clinton prepares to retake the White House in 2008, it is more vital than ever to clarify who she is and how she behaved the last time she occupied the West Wing.

My book, "Hillary's Secret War," tells their story. No one else has told it before.

Those who rely on Old Media believe that Nixon posed a threat to our freedom, while the Clintons were guilty of nothing more than a bad marriage. The Web Underground and its audience know better. We know that the Clintons were caught red-handed in a raft of abuses as grave as those for which Nixon was driven from office. Yet, unlike Nixon, the Clintons were never held to account.

For instance, Nixon's articles of impeachment accused him of attempting (but failing) to persuade the Internal Revenue Service to audit hostile journalists and political foes. By contrast, the Clinton IRS freely audited scores of White House critics, including prominent journalists. When the political nature of the audits became impossible to deny, IRS Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson – a friend of Hillary who had worked on the Clinton campaign – resigned, but never faced charges.

Nixon aide Charles Colson went to jail for leaking secret FBI background data to a reporter, in an effort to discredit Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg. By contrast, Clinton operatives commandeered over 1,000 FBI background files and got off scot-free. According to sworn witness testimony, Clinton aides entered the data from these files into a computer database. This information presumably remains in Clinton hands to this day. No one knows – nor seems to care – how they have used that data through the years.

Thanks to a veritable mass-media blackout, most Americans have no idea that such allegations were ever raised against the Clintons.

In a May 22, 2004, broadcast, Rush Limbaugh offered these thoughts on the war between Old and New Media – a war between rival storytellers whose outcome will largely determine what future generations know and believe about our time. Limbaugh said:


We're not going to win this in my lifetime ... [T]he history of this is going to be written long after all of us are buried and in heaven, because the people alive now who are writing about it are the people who are losing. They are not getting it right ... But at some point, folks ... we on the right, in the New Media, Internet, talk radio, Fox News ... we're going to become the majority, and the seismic shift, whenever that happens, let's just say 50 years from now or 75 ... it is those people who are not even born yet, who are going to look back and they're going to research this, without any bias of having been involved in it, and they're going to write the history of what's going on now. And it will be the accurate history.

Spiked by Big Media

After compelling me to perform several rewrites – during which process I was told, among other things, that my book contained too much "Hillary-bashing" – my publisher suddenly announced that it would not publish my book at all. The publisher was Crown Forum, a division of Random House.

Hillary's secret police

As mentioned earlier, Hillary Clinton told reporters on Feb. 11, 1998, that the Internet needed an "editing" or "gatekeeping" function. She neglected to mention at the press conference that she was already working on the problem. Indeed, she had been waging a secret war to silence Internet dissidents for the last four years. She continues waging it today.

In the Clinton White House, Hillary played the role of enforcer. She commanded what came to be known as the Clinton "secret police," a covert operation comparable to Nixon's Plumbers, dedicated to suppressing evidence of Clinton crimes. "Hillary is not merely an aider and abettor to this secret police operation. She has been its prime instigator and organizer," wrote the late Barbara Olson in her 1999 book "Hell to Pay."

Mrs. Olson was in a position to know. A former federal prosecutor, she served as chief investigative counsel for Congressman William F. Clinger Jr.'s House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which probed Hillary's role in the Travelgate and Filegate scandals in 1995 and 1996.

During the Clinton years, journalists who probed too deeply into Clinton scandals walked a dangerous path. At the very least, they would be pulled from the Clinton beat, their stories discredited and their careers tarnished. In some cases, they were beaten, wiretapped, framed on criminal charges, fired and blacklisted. They experienced burglaries, IRS audits, smear campaigns and White-House-orchestrated lawsuits.

Some of the White House "secret police" were private detectives, such as Terry Lenzner, Jack Palladino and Anthony Pellicano. Others were Clinton loyalists embedded in federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, the CIA, the IRS, the National Transportation Safety Board and so on. Many of these people are still in place, and still doing the Clintons' dirty work. I call them the Shadow Team.

In their effort to suppress negative press coverage, the Clintons encountered little resistance from Big Media. Major news organizations were easily brought to heel, their parent companies being acutely vulnerable to federal regulatory action. Even Fox News and talk radio had to tread lightly on some issues, lest their FCC licenses receive unwelcome scrutiny.

The Internet, however, lay beyond Hillary's control.

Hillary's Shadow Team issued a secret report in 1995 titled "The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce." It characterized the Internet as a dangerously "unregulated" medium, potentially devastating in its ability to bypass the controlled, corporate newspapers and networks. In Hillary's view, the Internet presented a grave threat to Clinton power. For that reason, her secret police persecuted Internet dissidents with special ferocity.

Hillary's shadow government

The struggle continues today. The Clintons may be out of the White House, but Hillary's covert network remains powerfully alive.

In October 2004, David Horowitz and I published a three-part expose at FrontPageMagazine.com called, "The Shadow Party." It revealed how Hillary Clinton and George Soros had joined forces to create a network of radical billionaires, non-profit foundations, 527 committees, public employee unions and leftwing nongovernmental organization's.

This "Shadow Party" has evolved into a veritable government-in-exile, with enormous influence in every sector of corporate, cultural, political, academic, financial and public life. Its most successful project to date has been the suppression of free speech through the McCain-Feingold Act.

On Nov. 30, 1994 , three weeks after Republicans swept Congress in the mid-term elections, George Soros announced in a speech that he wished to "do something about ... the distortion of our electoral process by the excessive use of TV advertising."

Eight months later, Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold obligingly rose on the Senate floor to denounce soft-money abuses, thus setting in motion the juggernaut that would ultimately give us the McCain-Feingold Act of March 27, 2002.

Also in 1994, Republican Sen. John McCain set up the Reform Institute for Campaign and Election Issues, which is heavily funded by Soros' Open Society Institute. This non-profit think-tank would become a nerve center for the campaign finance reform lobby.

Perhaps most significantly, 1994 marked the beginning of a $140-million scheme which would eventually become known as the "Pewgate" scandal. That year, a group of non-profit foundations associated with the Soros network began bankrolling "experts" and front groups whose purpose was to bamboozle Congress into thinking that millions of Americans were clamoring for "campaign finance reform" – even though they were not.


Pewgate's tentacles reached even to the U.S. Supreme Court. Many of the legal arguments upon which the court based its Dec. 10, 2003, decision to uphold McCain-Feingold derived from data now deemed to have been fraudulent – data cooked up by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, a Soros-funded operation which received millions in Pewgate lucre.

"[A]lmost half the footnotes relied on by the Supreme Court in upholding [McCain-Feingold] are research funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts," Treglia crows in the videotape. Treglia currently sits on the board of the Pew-funded Institute for Policy, Democracy & the Internet, which seeks to tighten regulation of political speech on the Web.

Why Hillary matters

With the passage of McCain-Feingold, Soros' Shadow Party scored its first great victory. Now that same network busies itself grooming Hillary Clinton for the presidency.

For a first-term junior senator, Hillary has acquired extraordinary power on Capitol Hill. She can make or break virtually any of her fellow Democrats. As chairwoman of the Democratic Steering and Coordination Committee, she can block or approve her colleagues' committee assignments. More important, her political machine exercises de facto control over the party's purse strings. The Shadow Party raised some $300 million for Democrats during the 2004 election.

Regarding the Democratic Party, MoveOn PAC director and Soros operative Eli Pariser boasted after the last election, "Now it's our party. We bought it, we own it."

"Hillary Rodham Clinton has ... utterly [taken] over the Senate Democrats and the party itself – inside and out – and she has done it in a mere two years," marvels R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. in his 2004 book "Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to Power."

Hillary's secret police will no doubt play a role in smoothing the way for her planned return to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Likewise, the Internet will figure prominently in the effort to stop her. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45138