"I want to take the oil company profits and put them into an energy fund"
That's right, this politician wants to have THE GOVERNMENT TAKE THE PROFITS OF PRIVATE COMPANIES.
So who said it?
A. Hugo Chavez
B. Vladimir Putin
C. Hillary Clinton
D. All of the above
Here's the answer
Donkey adds....
The Socs Versus The Greasers
"I want to take those profits, and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund"
Hillary Clinton on Exxon's record quarter.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
American Heritage definition of Socialism.
And liberals have a problem with me calling them pinkos why?
This just goes to show you how deep the hatred for Bush actually is on the left. Apple Computer has been posting record profits, Google has a market cap larger than McDonalds and Ford combined, Home Builders have been reporting blockbuster sales, Milk prices are at an all time high.....but its always Big Bad Oil that bears the brunt of the hippie wrath. It makes no sense and it demonstrates just how irrational liberals are, not to mention the fact that pro-war Hillary is leading in every poll for the candidacy of the anti-war Democrat Party. You do the math...they are all a bunch of hateful frauds. As Rhino is oft known to say...When will Atlas shrug?
EE-Aw!!!
28 comments:
She is probably talking about raising the taxes on oil company profits which is a fine idea.
yeah gary, thats a fine SOCIALIST idea.
I can't watch the video clip but googling shows that Hillary is for "taking away subsidies to big oil and a Strategic Energy Fund, on a par with the Manhattan Project, funded by windfall profits tax on big oil."
A fine idea. Since when are taxes socialist? No taxes, no government. Are you an Anarchist?
Why is it a fine idea? Why only Oil? Why punish success? Its crap. As Ive said many times before if Bush was a dairyman, libs would be talking about raising taxes on Skim.
There is no probably to it and no room for interpretation (as is the liberal wont to do). She wants the profits of others to share with the undeserving bcuz they are Oil. Its pathetic and its dangerous and its unAmerican
No taxes no government?
Perhaps you arent as familiar with your Country's history as I gave you credit for.
come on, the attack on oil isn't just about the left's hatred of bush.
and while i don't think it's productive to raise taxes on oil companies (not tantamount to socialism and you really shouldn't cry wolf on that issue), i do think it's high time we re-evaluate our subsidies to encourage the development of cleaner technologies.
Running a government requires taxation. Come on. Why oil? Exxon just posted the largest profits ever. That's where the money is. Also their products are major contributors to global warming, yet they are funding the deniers on that issue. Did you see the news reports on the international scientific report on global warming issued just today? Over 90% probability (a conservative estimate) that human activity is driving global warming.
It isnt all about Bush but you gotta admit it sure has a hell of alot to do with it. I dont recall too many oil sympathizers when they almost went belly up building the Alaskan pipeline.
I should qualify that to say that no effectively run gov't should need the level of taxation that currently exists. Any system in which I keep 50 cents on every dollar I earn is a failed system. Any system where that 50 cents then goes to buying $20,000 hammers and supporting unemployed crack whores is criminal.
Look at FedEx and UPS..that should have been the USPS, just as one example.
It is tantamount to socialism. Its not taxation when you bring up "windfall" taxes..that is Chavezian Socialism.
I do agree that we need alternatives and think T Boone Pickens is right that it should be Natural Gas related. Its a significantly cleaner fuel thats an abundant natural resource to North America.
Gary its good to see you finally admit that the scientific "consensus" has a margin of error and is not infallible, and even if that is indeed correct it does not necessarily justify the proposed course of action from the greenies.
I've never said that the consensus on global warming was unanimous or that science is infallible. Still, when you start getting numbers of 90% plus, don't you think that just maybe we should do something?
If hilary clinton is elected president I will kill myself...seriously. Luckily she has absolutely no chance in hell and thats one of the biggest problems with the democratic party, they are trying to push canidates that a majority of the nation would never vote for
Roughly the same percentage of Congress (with access to the same information as the President) authorized the Iraq War and yet you do not agree with that do you?
So its not really about the numbers now is it Gary, but rather that the ideology match your own?
DB I wish you were right, but in a country where celebrity trumps substance Im afraid that she has a very realistic chance. Ive got to believe she can do at least as well as Kerry, it all depends on her opponent...be afraid very afraid (and ready to move to Galts Gulch)
Increasingly conservatives are coming around on global warming because it is about the science, not ideology. I have seen statements in the last few days by the President of the American Association for the Advancement for Science, himself a Harvard climate scientist, and the head of the Royal Society of England. The science is in and it is time to act.
Its so convenient to have Donksy to agree with. I dont even have to type.
i personally think hillary is the most qualified candidate we have at this point. for better or for worse. and why would one want to kill oneself should she be elected? she's paid her dues in ways that no one else out there has.
she's not calling to "punish" success. she's actually asking the really "successful" (if you can call it that) companies to make an investment in supporting up and coming technologies and therefore up and coming new firms that will open the competitive field wide open. big oil has a lock on the $$, she's making them act as venture capital firms ... all good.
Anita,
Well thats just silly to claim that Hillary is more qualified than someone like Biden (whos a jackass)...hell Kucinich (an ass)is more qualified than Hillary on the dem side...but shes got the name and thats what this process has come down to....celebrity. Who am I kidding...its what its always been. Its just gotten worse.
We need someone new. I love Jeb but if he ran I wouldnt vote for him.
Well thats reassuring ..as long as its just the really really really successful companies. But its just silly to suggest they should act as investment angels for potential competitors...new technologies Im all for(as previously mentioned) but Hillary should not be able to control the marketplace, as she suggested.
EB,
Thats just lazy. Now youre saying nothing by proxy.
Donkey-
I will tell you why hilary has no chance. There simply isnt enough people in this country who are willing to vote for a woman, qualified or not.
Similarly there are not enough people in this country who would vote for a black man, qualified or not.
If Al Gore didnt have a jewish running mate he probably would have won the election. The republicans are not willing to take those risks and thats why they have a far better chance.
If its Hilary Vs. Satans Spawn I will vote for Satan.
biden (d-mnba) has seen his day as a candidate. he would have been good if he hadn't made a fool of himself so many times. he's a very bright man but i agree, he's a jackass. kucinich is too far to the left to be nominated. edwards is too soft and he can't play the 'commonman' role for too long because he's gonna be found out. actually, his wife would make a pretty good candidate.
that's the problem with the big oil companies and the big car companies, they have stifled competition ... through their lobbyists and friends in government and the big marketing firms they are able to hire they have consistently been able to move the conversation from small cars and efficient energy to large monster cars for everyone and forget about improving public transportation ... it's not in their best interests.
hillary is not suggesting this, but don't you think it's a good idea to try to break up the pseudo-monopololy of the big oil companies? don't we all win in that case? isn't that allowing capitalism and free competition to thrive?
or his spawn rather.
showbrawy, you are WRONG on all of your points.
you sound like a sexistracistantisemite ... i don't think you are, but that's what you sound like.
"Sexistracistantisemite"
...one of the Chili Peppers better albums.
Why can't we all just unite behind our Rightful President, Al Gore?
GARY NEEDS TO LEARN NOT TO OVERWIND HIS TOYS.....place nice GARY.
xoxoxJANExoxoxo
Besides Gary made my day with his sweet comment this morning.xoxoxox,gary
But that wierd thing YOU said Donkey...what the HELL was THAAAT? MORE detail than "I always drink to world peace"---Jane is sleep deprived, so she doesn't get your high brow comment, LOVE YA---MEAN IT!xoxoxox, donkey
My second favorite quote from Groundhog Day.
Obviously the first is...
"Im a god. Im not the God... I don't think."
jane is so, hmmm ... EFFUSIVE.
Sorry guys i was busy on friday but let me just address this BULLSHIT global warming debate.
The warming lobby is a MULTI BILLION DOLLAR deal on BOTH sides. The fact that the oil companies pay for research doesn't mean they're wrong it just means they're protecting their interests.
I don't believe that we are causing global warming for the simple reason that the earth has been warming and cooling for millions of years before i ever got my first SUV. I live on an island that WAS FORMED BY A MELTING GLACIER. That was long before urban sprawl, and long before lily, jane, and anita were spraying their hair up with those dastardly CFC's.
Explain to me how the glaciers melted WITHOUT our help but now they're only melting BECAUSE of us, and then MAYBE i'll start to recycle.
I still think they're all wrong, and they're all wrong and the incentive for them to find us responsible is the same as the incentive for the other side. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Also, besides the fact that it's a socialist idea, taking the profits of the oil companies is stupid because it would be spent by OUR GOVERNMENT, which means it would be wasted. If you want alternative energy sources let private industry do what they need to do. If the government would get the hell out of the way most of us would probably be using cheap clean efficient nuclear energy by now.
rhino, the fact that you live on a land mass that was formed by retreating glaciers has absolutely no bearing on the current global warming argument. it's an interesting geological factoid of course. but it's also true large parts of the north united states have been formed, or at keast affected, in the same way. just as large parts of the mid-west were once warm and tropical and now are not. the dinosaurs are gone too. (well, except for you and donkosaurus trogloditian rex.) but so what.
the current situation is clearly different, and it is acknowledged to be so, as gary notes of the large majority scientific community (and future nobel prize winner, algore) agree that human activity has SPEEDED UP and interfered with the natural processes which previously took millenia upon millenia upon millenia to transpire.
PS ... i'm a hippie, remember? i don't use hair spray ... or soap ... or shampoo ... although i do get the occasional manicure and pedicure.
Post a Comment