Out of Context (Kat-Mo)

So, Obama and his campaign think they are going to spin their way out of the last little surprise from Obama's past. In response to the audio coming out indicating Obama is willing to see energy prices for consumers "skyrocket" in order to force coal plants out of existence with unprecedented "cap and trade" taxation, Obama's campaign team responds it was "taken out of context". Why?

because in the interview Obama said that “this notion of no coal, I think is an illusion.” Obama and McCain have both pushed for technology to develop cleaner burning coal. “What we have to do then is figure out how can we use coal without emitting greenhouse gases and carbon,” Obama told the Chronicle in the interview.

Right. The only issue here is the alleged destruction of energy producing coal plants. Not that, that isn't egregious enough. But let's stick to the real point here. While driving these businesses out of business, he's willing to see energy prices "sky rocket", making it extremely difficult for the average citizen to continue heating their homes. We are talking about 100% increase in energy bills, if not higher. As if the recent horrifying spike in oil prices hadn't already driven energy prices higher by up to 50% in the last two years.

He's not just talking about bankrupting energy companies that don't meet his standards, he's talking about energy prices that will drive other businesses out of business and destroy jobs. He's talking about making it hard for even middle class families to heat and cool their homes. He's talking about possibly creating a second economic crisis that will drive even more people into foreclosure and bankruptcy. And, let's not forget the elderly and others on fixed incomes.

How is Obama planning to offset this horrific rate hike?

Well, in the past, he's indicated his plan to tax energy companies even more and give "qualifying" people a $1000 subsidy to pay for their energy. Well, Obama must not pay his own bills at home or else he would know that $1000 after his 100% or higher rate increase for energy, plus the added taxes that will be passed on to regular consumers, won't pay for 20% of any one household's energy bill. Possibly less.

Under the Obama plan, when energy bills are averaging $300-$400/mo or 20 to 80% or more of a household's monthly income (do you know what the average social security check is?), when the food prices (helllooo?) are 25-50% higher from these raised energy prices and mortgage rates have ballooned due to our current economic crisis, how exactly are people supposed to survive?

In addition, he claims that people will get an offset in this energy price increase by simply changing light bulbs, better insulation or updated appliances like heaters, air conditioners, water heaters, etc. Well, maybe Mr. Obama doesn't live in this world either because the only "cheap" thing on that list are light bulbs. How is the average household paying a hefty mortgage and already trying to stay in their home supposed to update this equipment? Where is that money coming from? Exactly what new equipment is going to help reduce energy bills to anything resembling its past affordable rates, even if it cuts this new higher bill in half, it will still be twice as high as just two years ago? Something that is already affecting people's ability to heat their homes. Does no one do the math anymore?

Speaking of socialism, why would any President artificially force energy prices higher and then make people dependent on the government for a stipend to keep their energy on? A stipend, I've already noted, that won't be worth the check it's written on. Oh, except I nearly forgot, on top of that he will write laws that require the energy companies to keep pumping this electricity and natural gas for free into "qualified" homes. Another cost passed on to all other consumers and greatly impacting our economy while making more and more people dependent on government largesse. Because the only way that is going to happen is if the government provides huge subsidies to energy companies to offset the cost of this free energy.

If anyone has had to work with the "disadvantaged", with the elderly on fixed incomes or the working poor, there is only so many that actually qualify based on income. Even under an extended Obama plan raising that income bar, there would still be millions more without heat in the winter, air conditioning in the summer or even electricity at any point because they did not qualify for this direct assistance. There are plenty of people who have to choose today between electricity or heat and food. What Sen. Obama is planning will increase those having to make that choice by ten fold.

Let us not forget, if we haven't already, in the heady rush of decreased gasoline prices lately, that Sen. Obama has also indicated that he would be happy to see gasoline at $10/gallon. This is one of the reasons that the democrats have refused to consider off shore drilling, to have a short term moratorium on federal gas taxes or any other efforts to decrease the price of gasoline or heating fuel. He has even indicated the likelihood of increased taxes on oil and gasoline to artificially inflate these prices as well and further drive up the cost of heating as well as transportation and food prices.

Why is Obama's radical plan, a plan that will likely cause great hardship in the next decade or greater if allowed to exist, getting a pass from all of these media sources? Is it actually necessary to bankrupt millions of people and destroy our economy for years to come for some ecological impact that no one really fully understands nor can predict it's exact time, if ever?

Wake up and smell the Soviet bread lines, comrades. This is the most radical aspect of Obama's entire policy and it is a manufactured crisis, no more or less than the untold numbers of crisis created in third world countries "for the greater good", that usually ends up with worse consequences, like famine, a broken economy and a broken, displaced populace. It usually ends up with government power being extended over greater and greater parts of society in an alleged attempt to stave off each more devastating effect of government interference in and control in the market.

Somebody, anybody, in the media, take some advice from Sen. Obama and get in his face. Ask him what he means. Don't take this garbage about "no questions until after the election". When has that ever stopped any real reporters from making an effort or making it uncomfortable for someone to skate by with such a lame response? Are there any real journalists out there who will ask hard questions or do they just reserve those "tough questions" for Gov. Palin?

Report this information. Is this a free media that is supposed to be the eyes, ears and voice of a free people or should we just take away all those lovely initials like CBS, NBC, CNN, etc and replace it with one word: Pravda?

Recently, some fellow was on AoSHQ talking about the great "income disparity" in this nation and the necessity to "level the playing field" by increasing taxes on the "rich" and providing Obama's tax welfare to those who don't pay taxes. What I would like to know from this gentleman and those like him is if they have ever actually passed any basic math class. Because, simply put, with the cost of energy, transportation, housing and food rising to $5,000 or greater per year per household, what good is a $1500 or even $3,000 "refundable tax credit" when these people are going to see a net cost of living increase of $2,000-$4,000?

That is not "spreading the wealth around". That is whole sale destitution of an entire citizenry with the hardest hit, in fact, being the poor and the middle class. The problem in this country is that there are too many who have a mythological view of American history. Some where, some how, people have romanticized the "sacrifices" of the depression era along with the great crime wave that accompanied it. Subsistence living on the government dole with long soup lines and 30% unemployment has turned into a national triumph when, in fact, it was a terrible tragedy. When, in fact, our great grandparents and grand parents worked extremely hard to leave that era behind and create a better life for their descendants.

People are willing to vote Obama in because he says the word "sacrifice" within soaring rhetoric, further adding to its "romance" as if accepting a government manufactured crisis "for the greater good" is the thing "we've been waiting for" and will somehow purify the American soul. Someone should remind our erstwhile citizenry that there was a great number of our recent ancestors in the depression era who put sawdust in their bread as a partial substitute for flour because they simply could not afford to buy the flour they needed to make real bread. One could ask exactly how "purifying" was that experience and who wants to repeat it.

In fact, the middle class appears strangely willing to sell their votes for about a $500 tax decrease when there is every indication that he is planning to increase the cost of living by ten fold that return and allow Bush's tax cuts to expire, effectively making that "tax credit" nil. It is political slight of hand and it is most egregious because our media and our representatives in government are willing to perpetrate this great scam for some inexplicable reason. "Global warming" is not a good enough reason to impoverish an entire nation. Ask the Europeans who are busy trying to nullify or extend any part of the Kyoto Treaty that has stagnated their industries and added to their increasing unemployment.

Senator Obama claims that his plan was taken out of context. The only thing that has been "out of context" in this entire election is the idea that Obama is some sort of moderate or that he actually gives a damn about the poor or the elderly or the middle class or the future of this nation.

posted by xgenghisx at 08:09 AM

| Access Comments