Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It is amazing to read through this thread and look at the comments - we have out-and-out lies, stupidity and misinterpretations.
The threat title is simply a lie, pure and simple. In reality, the story has nothing whatsoever to do with ethanol, and I guess the OP knows that. But why be honest?
There isn't a fact in sight, and it's clear not one poster actually checked the story before posting.
I have never seen such absolute desperate hatred for any politician as we see for Obama on threads like this one. It's deranged.
No wonder the guy is leading in the polls - you guys really help him out.
It is amazing to read through this thread and look at the comments - we have out-and-out lies, stupidity and misinterpretations.
The threat title is simply a lie, pure and simple. In reality, the story has nothing whatsoever to do with ethanol, and I guess the OP knows that. But why be honest?
There isn't a fact in sight, and it's clear not one poster actually checked the story before posting.
I have never seen such absolute desperate hatred for any politician as we see for Obama on threads like this one. It's deranged.
No wonder the guy is leading in the polls - you guys really help him out.
Gawd, I was just thinking the same thing. So many threads are met with rw's saying "ditto" and having no idea what they're agreeing with. I've been reading and wondering where to begin. Some of these people really need to go back to junior high.
I fault him when his green ideology overrules his fucken common-sense.Partisan paranoia and hate is feed for ignorance and unfortunatly it is drought resistant.
Drought is the problem. It is a very real challenge with domino implications.
To fault the Administration for trying to react to a bad situation is the equivalent of me charging Republicans in Congress of Fillabusting rainfall to make Obama look bad.
It is amazing to read through this thread and look at the comments - we have out-and-out lies, stupidity and misinterpretations.
The threat title is simply a lie, pure and simple. In reality, the story has nothing whatsoever to do with ethanol, and I guess the OP knows that. But why be honest?
There isn't a fact in sight, and it's clear not one poster actually checked the story before posting.
I have never seen such absolute desperate hatred for any politician as we see for Obama on threads like this one. It's deranged.
No wonder the guy is leading in the polls - you guys really help him out.
Gawd, I was just thinking the same thing. So many threads are met with rw's saying "ditto" and having no idea what they're agreeing with. I've been reading and wondering where to begin. Some of these people really need to go back to junior high.
Shut up asshole. All you know is Obama is wonderful and anything he does has to be good.
Your argument always goes back to we must hate Obama
The lousy prick has made it obvious he doesn't like us, so why should we like him?
I fault him when his green ideology overrules his fucken common-sense.Partisan paranoia and hate is feed for ignorance and unfortunatly it is drought resistant.
Drought is the problem. It is a very real challenge with domino implications.
To fault the Administration for trying to react to a bad situation is the equivalent of me charging Republicans in Congress of Fillabusting rainfall to make Obama look bad.
Iowa and other corn states wanted and pushed for ethanol production and got it, bitch at them, Obama does not pass the laws about ethanol,nor does he pass the farm bill, nor does he set farm policy, This years bill has not passed, the repubs killed it also, like so many other bills trying to go through Congress.
They will dole it out to whoever is a party loyalist.
Given this is false, are you going to withdraw the statement, or just apologise?
I really don't get posters just lying. Why not post honestly?
The president will also direct the Department of Defense, a large purchaser of meat, to 'encourage' its vendors to speed up purchases of lamb, pork and beef and freeze it for later use.
'This is a win-win. Farmers and ranchers will have an opportunity to sell more of their products at this critical time and taxpayers will get a better price on food that would have been purchased later,' a White House official said.
Read more: Department of Agriculture: Barack Obama to announce plan to buy $170m of food to support drought-hit farmers | Mail Online
Gawd, I was just thinking the same thing. So many threads are met with rw's saying "ditto" and having no idea what they're agreeing with. I've been reading and wondering where to begin. Some of these people really need to go back to junior high.
Shut up asshole. All you know is Obama is wonderful and anything he does has to be good.
Your argument always goes back to we must hate Obama
The lousy prick has made it obvious he doesn't like us, so why should we like him?
maybe you could climb down from your I hate Obama and I will lie about anything to play character assassin stage and realize you are wrong.
The Obama administration is reviewing the country’s ethanol policy amid calls from both political parties and the United Nations to suspend annual targets as the worst drought in 56 years spurs corn prices.
Twenty-five U.S. senators, both Republicans and Democrats, asked Lisa Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to halt or lower mandates on how much ethanol the country must use this year and next. The senators’ Aug. 7 letter followed an Aug. 1 petition from a bipartisan coalition of 156 members of the House of Representatives.
“I would simply say that the EPA, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, is looking at this,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said today in Washington. “I don’t have a statement one way or the other predicting what the experts are going to say.”
A 2007 energy law known as the Renewable Fuels Standard mandates the use of 13.2 billion gallons of biofuels such as ethanol this year, and 13.6 billion in 2013.
A smaller U.S. corn crop doesn’t justify calls for Obama to suspend the mandate, according to the Renewable Fuels Association, a Washington trade group. It said refiners can meet the targets by drawing from ample stockpiles and utilizing excess credits that can be submitted in lieu of physically blending a gallon of ethanol.
Ethanol production also results in distillers grains, a byproduct of manufacturing the fuel, that can be fed to livestock and poultry, Growth Energy Chief Executive Officer Tom Buis said in a statement today in response to a UN call to alter the policy.
Obama Administration Looking at Ethanol Rules - BloombergLivestock and poultry producers on July 30 called on Obama to reduce the mandate saying that it is causing “severe economic harm.”
Delaware Governor Jack Markell and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, both Democrats, sent a letter to the EPA’s Jackson today supporting the waiver, saying that the Renewable Fuels Standard may hurt their farmers and poultry companies.
Ethanol production was 817,000 barrels a day last week, down 15 percent from a record in December. Stockpiles sank 3.9 percent to 18.7 million barrels, the lowest level since Dec. 30, Energy Department data show.
Maybe you could face the truth also, Mr. Myopic.
The Obama administration is reviewing the country’s ethanol policy amid calls from both political parties and the United Nations to suspend annual targets as the worst drought in 56 years spurs corn prices.
Twenty-five U.S. senators, both Republicans and Democrats, asked Lisa Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to halt or lower mandates on how much ethanol the country must use this year and next. The senators’ Aug. 7 letter followed an Aug. 1 petition from a bipartisan coalition of 156 members of the House of Representatives.
“I would simply say that the EPA, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, is looking at this,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said today in Washington. “I don’t have a statement one way or the other predicting what the experts are going to say.”
A 2007 energy law known as the Renewable Fuels Standard mandates the use of 13.2 billion gallons of biofuels such as ethanol this year, and 13.6 billion in 2013.
A smaller U.S. corn crop doesn’t justify calls for Obama to suspend the mandate, according to the Renewable Fuels Association, a Washington trade group. It said refiners can meet the targets by drawing from ample stockpiles and utilizing excess credits that can be submitted in lieu of physically blending a gallon of ethanol.
Ethanol production also results in distillers grains, a byproduct of manufacturing the fuel, that can be fed to livestock and poultry, Growth Energy Chief Executive Officer Tom Buis said in a statement today in response to a UN call to alter the policy.
Obama Administration Looking at Ethanol Rules - BloombergLivestock and poultry producers on July 30 called on Obama to reduce the mandate saying that it is causing “severe economic harm.”
Delaware Governor Jack Markell and Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, both Democrats, sent a letter to the EPA’s Jackson today supporting the waiver, saying that the Renewable Fuels Standard may hurt their farmers and poultry companies.
Ethanol production was 817,000 barrels a day last week, down 15 percent from a record in December. Stockpiles sank 3.9 percent to 18.7 million barrels, the lowest level since Dec. 30, Energy Department data show.
It would seem as if the president has let the experts handle the situation and I believe they will waiver the mandate. See no big deal, why get so worked up over nothing more than fear journalism?
Mudwhistle -
Rather than just repeating the same rant, why not address points other posters are raising.
"Ethanol production also results in distillers grains, a byproduct of manufacturing the fuel, that can be fed to livestock and poultry,"
Moonglow raised a good point here - why not respond to it?
Taxpayers aren't going to save any money when the government is taking the products out of the market.
Even if the government can make a case for food products being redirected to fuel production, what is the point of the government buying up the food supply rather than just letting the price fall naturally?
Maybe you could face the truth also, Mr. Myopic.
The Obama administration is reviewing the countrys ethanol policy amid calls from both political parties and the United Nations to suspend annual targets as the worst drought in 56 years spurs corn prices.
Twenty-five U.S. senators, both Republicans and Democrats, asked Lisa Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to halt or lower mandates on how much ethanol the country must use this year and next. The senators Aug. 7 letter followed an Aug. 1 petition from a bipartisan coalition of 156 members of the House of Representatives.
Obama Administration Looking at Ethanol Rules - BloombergLivestock and poultry producers on July 30 called on Obama to reduce the mandate saying that it is causing severe economic harm.
Delaware Governor Jack Markell and Maryland Governor Martin OMalley, both Democrats, sent a letter to the EPAs Jackson today supporting the waiver, saying that the Renewable Fuels Standard may hurt their farmers and poultry companies.
Ethanol production was 817,000 barrels a day last week, down 15 percent from a record in December. Stockpiles sank 3.9 percent to 18.7 million barrels, the lowest level since Dec. 30, Energy Department data show.
It would seem as if the president has let the experts handle the situation and I believe they will waiver the mandate. See no big deal, why get so worked up over nothing more than fear journalism?
Obama said no.
Then he bragged about buying the extra meat.
Now he claims he needs time to look at the rules.
I remember when he said he couldn't grant amnesty. Said he didn't have the authority. Then he did.
Obama does what he wants. He doesn't want to do this, it's clear as day.
He wants prices to go up but he doesn't want to be blamed for it. That's the main hangup.
Even if the government can make a case for food products being redirected to fuel production, what is the point of the government buying up the food supply rather than just letting the price fall naturally?
I don't know the answer but this is just another example of Big Brother interfering where it doesn't belong.
Maybe you could face the truth also, Mr. Myopic.
Obama Administration Looking at Ethanol Rules - Bloomberg
It would seem as if the president has let the experts handle the situation and I believe they will waiver the mandate. See no big deal, why get so worked up over nothing more than fear journalism?
Obama said no.
Then he bragged about buying the extra meat.
Now he claims he needs time to look at the rules.
I remember when he said he couldn't grant amnesty. Said he didn't have the authority. Then he did.
Obama does what he wants. He doesn't want to do this, it's clear as day.
He wants prices to go up but he doesn't want to be blamed for it. That's the main hangup.
show me where he said no?
He is letting the heads of the departments study it, sorry it is how govt. works. i know you want instant action, sorry, it's govt. at work, takes time. To late for the corn crop anyway, too late to save soybeans. What do you want from the president, even with a waiver ther is no more than what is already there and what is grown for fuel production was burned up also.
it takes time to grow a crop, evidently the farmers decide what to plant, or do you want Oblama to do that also, how about Oblama do a little rain dance in Native Americn garb, why don't you ask God for help and see how fast you get it.
He is buying meat to help farmers gain a little on prices, duh.
