For wanting to back out of the debates tomorrow while blaming the 'economy'?
Seems to me like he is just using it as an excuse to get more time to work on his answers to questions that Obama is clearly going to ace him on.
Regards,
Lee
Printable View
For wanting to back out of the debates tomorrow while blaming the 'economy'?
Seems to me like he is just using it as an excuse to get more time to work on his answers to questions that Obama is clearly going to ace him on.
Regards,
Lee
Yeah, because all of the economy hinges on the cost of one debate. How about he sell one of his many houses? Or pull his ad campaign? There are lots of ways he could personally help the economy other than pulling out of the debates. What a pud. And people STILL want to vote for him and the Hockey Mom. Ugh.
You know, McCrazy could be a good President, unfortunately i think Palin is 9and has proven herself to be many times) really as dumb as a box of rocks.
Regards,
Lee
I saw a reader poll yesterday on CNN where 71% of respondents said that it was a gimmick and/or an attempt to dodge, while 29% said that he was showing Presidential leadership and responsibility.
This is probably the same 29% that believes Bush is doing a fabulous job, and perhaps even the same 29% that believes that aliens regularly abduct humans using magic light rays, take them to their spacecraft, and have buttsex with them.
Obama needs to head on down to the debate college right now, site around there all day waiting and tonight when they are due to begin, sit on stage waiting for McCrazy to show up.
If mccrazy doesnt show up, Obama needs to tell them that the debate should go on and he should just sit there and answer every single question they fire at him and just rip the hell out of McCrazy.
That would guarantee a Democratic President after the elections, if McCrazy doesnt show up, this would be the best thing to ever happen to the Dems.
Regards,
Lee
He should also have David Letterman there in the audience asking him all the questions he was going to ask McCain on his show.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
I think the whole thing is a smoke screen.
Sarah Palin isn't ready to debate. She isn't ready to talk to someone who isn't feeding her answers.
The reason he wanted to postpone the debate was to be able to buy Sarah more time. I guess they thought she could cram for that exam if given 5 more days.
This whole thing is just a photo op and a good excuse to buy more time for his idiot running mate.
Well now CNN said that McCain will go down there and debate anyway.
So he flip flops on what he said again.
It was all a political stunt. He made Obama, aka Erkel, look as dumb as he is. Erkel states I have a phone call me if you need me. This debate wasn't over economic issues it was forgein policy, Mr Magoo's strong point.
Palin might be dumb as a bag of rocks but Biden, as shown on CNN, has no respect for citizens when he gets in a woman's face and tells her that the coal in the US is killing her and there is no such thing as clean coal.
There isnt LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by rdynow
All fossil fuels give off carbon emmisions, the UK has used coal for decades and its one of the dirtiest fuels out there $0.02
Natural gas is actually one of the cleanest fuels you can get, other than solar power, wind power, etc, etc...
Regards,
Lee
The technology is there for clean coal. Basically it involves washing the coal and the resulting gases. Until the costs of this technology are reduced or governments putting larger sums of money into advancing the technology it is not a viable solution. Since the US has the largest reserves of coal it seems logical to advance clean coal technology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
Unfortunately though, what they would have to use to 'power' the washing of the coal and resulting gases would have to be...Quote:
Originally Posted by rdynow
1) Dirty coal - As in, coal that hasnt been washed yet.
2) Gasoline - Which is going to emit polutants in to the atmosphere.
There is no such thing as 'clean coal' because to produce clean coal, you need to burn something that is going to emit polutants, therefore it makes the whole point of making the coal 'clean' moot.
Regards,
Lee
But wouldn't the entire process greatly reduce the amount of pollutants from the air?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee
No, because in order to clean the coal to begin with, you need to burn more polutants than you would already with 'dirty' coal releasing more carbon emissions than 'dirty' coal itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by DonMike
Liken it to going fishing in a garden pond using a stick of TNT if you will.
Regards,
Lee
Oh, okay. I have no idea. Solar?