Which Obama Promise Will Be Broken First?

[auditor0007]

Obama: Tax cuts? I said there would be tax cuts? What was I thinking? Sorry folks, we can't afford any tax cuts, especially if I'm going to spend all this money we don't have. As I said in my acceptance speech, there will need to be sacrifices, so I am asking that you all begin to sacrifice as I'm going to raise your taxes by about twenty percent.

 

[Andrew2382]

Drilling offshore

Will never happen, not one drill bit will touch the floor

Nuclear Power- we wont have one reactor built

 

[DiamondDave]

Obama: Tax cuts? I said there would be tax cuts? What was I thinking? Sorry folks, we can't afford any tax cuts, especially if I'm going to spend all this money we don't have. As I said in my acceptance speech, there will need to be sacrifices, so I am asking that you all begin to sacrifice as I'm going to raise your taxes by about twenty percent.

Yes indeed... it will most probably be taxes.. he'll pull a clinton...

'Oh.... I took a closer look and with the situation I will have to raise taxes on everyone making 80K or above'... he has pulled the wool over his supporters eyes thinking that he will cut taxes on the middle class... his programs, his handout to those who pay no fed income tax, and his hurting he will put on businesses (and the tax hits that will happen when small businesses do worse), will cost... and it will come directly from the top 40-50%

Reap what you sow, suckers... we'll be ready with the big "I told you so"

 

[rayboyusmc]

In a reply to your concerns, fuck you.

Let's see what he does accomplish first.

Now we could make a list of all the undelivered promises of the current incompetent in chief if there was room on these blogs.

This is the largest percent of the popular vote since Eisenhower was elected. Get over it. Most Americans want change.

If the die hard right don't intentionally fight just to sabotage him, we may get some actual real change for the better.

 

[Luc1]

Quit your whining, losers.

 

[busara]

Drilling offshore

Will never happen, not one drill bit will touch the floor

Nuclear Power- we wont have one reactor built

obama promised more nuclear powerplants? i missed that one

 

[DiamondDave]

no royboy

Most Americans wanted change, but for the sake of BDS, revenge, and the greedy entitlement mentality...

Every US citizen that is not beholden to the far left, like Obama is, should fight to ensure he does not revert to his history and his original stances of Marxist style control... it should not be made easy for him to make these radical changes... the right, the conservatives, the libertarians, all should have due diligence to fight to drag Obama more center... it won't be as good as having a conservative in the White House, but it will be better than if he is given free reign to hurt America

 

[Andrew2382]

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf

Page 6 on the bottom

Nuclear Energy

Read your President Elect energy plan

 

[Caligirl]

I think he will definitely stick to his word on tax breaks, health care, and some sort of (more obvious than current) movement on green jobs.

I'd have to agree the drilling might not happen, certainly not the way the drill baby drill group wants, but what do I know? There's a good point to be made that we ought to drill on approved lands first before opening up the coast.

 

[del]

In a reply to your concerns, fuck you.

back at ya, raybo

Let's see what he does accomplish first.

fair enough

Now we could make a list of all the undelivered promises of the current incompetent in chief if there was room on these blogs.

pssst, he wasn't running

This is the largest percent of the popular vote since Eisenhower was elected. Get over it. Most Americans want change.

math's not your strong suit is it? this isn't even the biggest percentage of popular vote since bush's daddy. obama got 52.5%, bush 1 53.4%
i won't embarass you further by putting up the numbers from 1984 and 1972, but you probably get the drift here.

If the die hard right don't intentionally fight just to sabotage him, we may get some actual real change for the better.

whining in advance is soooooo 2004, get with the times, raybo.

 

[Andrew2382]

Cali, the lands that are currently leased do not have any oil are not enough oil to be cost effective. It is a farse. The parts where oil companies know there are oil the government refuses to lease.

Also I believe last poll was close to 80% of the population wants drilling.

That includes right and left

 

[dilloduck]

Cali, the lands that are currently leased do not have any oil are not enough oil to be cost effective. It is a farse. The parts where oil companies know there are oil the government refuses to lease.

Also I believe last poll was close to 80% of the population wants drilling.

That includes right and left

Aren't we forgetting the promises he made about Iraq ? We are all the cries to bring our troops home --NOW.

 

[DiamondDave]

I think he will definitely stick to his word on tax breaks, health care, and some sort of (more obvious than current) movement on green jobs.

I'd have to agree the drilling might not happen, certainly not the way the drill baby drill group wants, but what do I know? There's a good point to be made that we ought to drill on approved lands first before opening up the coast.

no cali.. there is a poor argument for that... considering the oil drilling companies have studied and shown that the oil is not there... just because land is set aside does not mean it is the best place to drill

And keep hoping on those tax breaks.... the money for those programs, handouts to people who don't pay fed income taxes, government funded/assisted/managed healthcare, that money is coming from somewhere other than the top 5%

 

[Navy1960]

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/factsheet_energy_speech_080308.pdf

Page 6 on the bottom

Nuclear Energy

Read your President Elect energy plan

"Safe and Secure Nuclear Energy. Nuclear power represents more than 70 percent of our noncarbon generated electricity. It is unlikely that we can meet our aggressive climate goals if we eliminate nuclear power as an option. However, before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage, and proliferation."


In March 1999, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reversed its own policy and signed a contract with a consortium comprised of Duke Energy, COGEMA, and Stone & Webster (DCS) to design and operate a Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. Site preparation at the Savannah River Site (South Carolina) began in October 2005.

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, announced by the secretary of the Department of Energy, Samuel Bodman, on February 6, 2006, is a plan to form an international partnership to reprocess spent nuclear fuel in a way that renders the plutonium in it usable for nuclear fuel but not for nuclear weapons.


PUREX is an acronym standing for Plutonium and Uranium Recovery by EXtraction. The PUREX process is a liquid-liquid extraction method used to reprocess spent nuclear fuel, in order to extract uranium and plutonium, independent of each other, from the fission products. This is the most developed and widely used process in the industry at present. When used on fuel from commercial power reactors the plutonium extracted typically contains too much Pu-240 to be useful in a nuclear weapon. However, reactors that are capable of refuelling frequently can be used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, which can later be recovered using PUREX. Because of this, PUREX chemicals are monitored.

The fact is many nations are in the business of reprocessing for the Nuclear industry. The leaders have been for years countries like France and Japan. So the argument to not build what is currently the best source for adding to our "green technology" grid is not supported. While this argument about storage may have held sway in 1978 it does not have any credibility in todays nuclear energy environment. The other argument used against nuclear power on behalf of the President-elects plan is the proliferation argument. That is a weapons issue and again, it does not reflect the fact that weapons grade plutonium is at this moment being reprocessed into safe nuclear fuel. So in conclusion it is unlikely due to this lack of understanding and a obligation to the environmental lobby that Barack Obama will instutute any construction of any new nuclear facilities and that will do nothing but further deepen our dependance on foreign energy.

 

[Caligirl]

no cali.. there is a poor argument for that... considering the oil drilling companies have studied and shown that the oil is not there... just because land is set aside does not mean it is the best place to drill

And keep hoping on those tax breaks.... the money for those programs, handouts to people who don't pay fed income taxes, government funded/assisted/managed healthcare, that money is coming from somewhere other than the top 5%

I suppose I am just saying that if he *doesn't* carry through on the help to the middle calss (health care and tax breaks) then he will for sure be out in four years. So he has to keep those promises as a political manouver.

The green jobs is definitely a necessity for the mid term outlook for manufacturing in the country, particularly in the auto industry. I don't know that he'll get on it, but he'd better.

The oil I had heard differently than what you are saying - I had heard that tehre was a ton of oil under approved lands. So if you have a link to a survey site that says otherwise I'd be curious.

I also think education will be far down the list and any promises he made there might be forgotten. but he has to help the middle class if he wants to keep credibility, and if he is really interested in the country he will also work towards those green jobs.

 

[Andrew2382]

The oil I had heard differently than what you are saying - I had heard that tehre was a ton of oil under approved lands. So if you have a link to a survey site that says otherwise I'd be curious.

CNSNews.com - Oil Leases on ?68 Million Acres? No Guarantee of Oil, Experts Say

But oil producers say the Democrats' call to “require” companies to drill on the 68 million acres they've already leased is not honest.

In fact, oil producers must already meet government standards for producing oil on leases, said a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute (API), a trade organization that represents America’s oil and natural gas industry.

The Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management grants leases to oil companies with the requirement that the companies produce oil from the land within five to 10 years, depending on the stipulations of the lease, said Karen Matusic, media relations manager for the API.

Moreover, the oil companies pay billions of dollars for these leases, she said, with no guarantee that oil will be found in the leased areas.

“In effect, those leases are a right to explore,” Matusic said.

Matusic rejected the notion that oil companies are sitting on the land and not drilling because they want prices to rise, as Democrats have suggested. The oil companies are investing billions of dollars in the leased lands, she said, and “the last thing you want to do is sit on potential oil production or natural gas production.”

“If they aren’t being developed as fast as some in Congress would like them to be, the reason mainly has to do with geology, or the reality that it takes a long time to develop these leases, depending on where they are, and there is no guarantee that they have oil and gas on them,” she said.

Michael Morris, a petroleum markets expert at the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said drilling on the 68 million acres already leased would contribute little to the domestic oil supply.

If there was much more oil to be found, the oil companies would be drilling for it, he said, since it is in their best interest to obtain more oil.

“That’s pretty much tapped out,” he said of the 68 million acres. “And they’ve done seismic surveys of those areas, and they haven’t found much.”

On Aug. 6, House Republican Leader John Boehner issued an "alert," accusing "desperate Democrats" of peddling "myths" and taking "liberties" with the facts about domestic oil drilling and the Republicans' energy plan.

He said one of those "myths" involves the Democrats' "use it or lose it" policy for the 68 million acres where oil companies currently hold leases but are not drilling.

"The fact is, the so-called “use it or lose it” rule is already the law of the land, and Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) should know that because they voted for it all the way back in 1992," Boehner said.

He explained: "When an energy company gets a lease, there is no guarantee that there is oil or natural gas present under the leased lands. If oil is present, exploration, siting, and development can take up to a decade before any new energy is produced. So the land Democrats are talking about either has no recoverable energy resources, those resources are currently being developed, or they have already been developed. The entire process can take years."

 

[Caligirl]

Ah, OK.

 

[auditor0007]

In a reply to your concerns, fuck you.

Let's see what he does accomplish first.

Now we could make a list of all the undelivered promises of the current incompetent in chief if there was room on these blogs.

This is the largest percent of the popular vote since Eisenhower was elected. Get over it. Most Americans want change.

If the die hard right don't intentionally fight just to sabotage him, we may get some actual real change for the better.

Most Americans are too dumb to understand that this is not the change we need. I would have to include you in that statement. McCain certainly was no answer, but what we are going to get is a massive increase in the size of government. Federal spending as a percentage of GDP is going to easily surpass it's highest levels since WWII. In addition to that, the complete ignorance about the long term shortfalls in SS and Medicare will create even more spending. Given eight years, federal spending will be over 30% of GDP, and it will only be headed higher beyond that.

As I watched so many young people so cheerful last night, all I could do is wonder when they will wake up to reality. Everyone wants positive change. The problem is that those who supported Obama are choosing the type of change that is going to make things worse rather than better. Maybe I will be proven wrong. Obama may yet turn out to be a great President. In order to do so, he will have to break most all of his promises.

As for GW, he made a lot of mistakes. However, the financial crisis we are now in was due to Democrats and Republicans. In fact, the Dems had a much bigger hand in the mortgage meltdown than Republicans.

Down the road, there is one thing that Bush did that will most likely have a tremendous impact on all of our lives, for the positive. A couple of years ago, he allowed the further development of five 160 acre parcels of land in the Green River Basin to test a number of new methods for the extraction of oil from shale. It will be three to four more years before the results are in, but they look promising. If the new technologies that have been put into place prove to be effective, we will be able to begin extracting vast amounts of oil here in the US. With a move toward other renewable sources of energy, this oil production will almost certainly help to get us off of foreign oil. Most people don't know about the Green River Basin as it is not discussed very often, but it holds approximately 1.5 trillion barrels of extractable oil. Of course, this will only be a good thing if the wacko environmentalists don't try to put a stop to it in the name of who knows what kind of crazy ideas.

BTW, I don't need to turn to four letter words to make my points. But then again, I'm an adult.

 

[WillowTree]

Quit your whining, losers.

good advice, too bad you were too fucking stupid to do it for the last eight years. we are gonna whine now tile yer ears bleed. That's patriotic donchya know?

 

[sealybobo]

obama promised more nuclear powerplants? i missed that one

What promises' did Bush even make, let alone keep. I forgot.

It's like I just woke up from a nightmare/dream and I forgot all the details.