Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (2186)	9/7/2008 5:14:04 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

For the US to avoid becoming irretrievably entangled in the coming resource wars, I think McCain is one of the few who recognizes that energy independence equates to foreign policy options. And he's not picky about what kind of energy that equates to. I agree with you on the first half of your statement that we need to avoid the coming resource wars, although we are already involved in two resource wars: Iraq and Georgia. Luckily, no US troops are involved in the Georgia tangle, although Cheney is doing a great job escalating tensions there. The second half of your statement puzzles me, though. McCain doesn't seem to understand that our war in Iraq and the tussle in Georgia are connected to our oil dependence. And you say he isn't picky about what kind of energy we use, yet he has been a consistent proponent of drilling for oil everywhere while failing to vote for almost all of the alternative energy legislation that has come up for a vote. Again, it's not what he says. It's what he does. And right now, his record on alternative energy is abysmal. Here are the facts on McCain's alternative energy voting record, Hawk, if you are interested. You'll notice that when it was something good for more drilling for oil, he voted yes, but if it had to do with alternative energy he either didn't vote or he voted no. Those are the facts. votesmart.org