Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
User Journal

Journal smittyoneeach's Journal: The GOP's red state kickbacks are as ugly as anything the Dems do 39

Journal by smittyoneeach

When Congress threw ethanol producers a gigantic bone by expanding the Renewable Fuel Standard through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 by annually increasing the amount of ethanol that fuel refiners are required to blend into the nation's gasoline supply, they blithely made the crucial assumption that Americans' gasoline consumption would continue to increase indefinitely. Thanks to heightened fuel efficiency and slackened driving habits, however, Americans' demand for gasoline has actually decreased, meaning that refiners would have to blend gasoline with ethanol well above the E10 level that is considered safe for most of the older cars and trucks on the road today in order to comply properly.

The GOP can just take all its pious capitalistic talk and cram it someplace useful. Ethanol is to the GOP what all these crappy green energy and global warming scams are to Democrats.
What a pile of crap.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The GOP's red state kickbacks are as ugly as anything the Dems do More

The GOP's red state kickbacks are as ugly as anything the Dems do

Comments Filter:

  • AFAIK ethanol subsidies are about individual representatives wanting to support business/jobs in their state, not about some party-wide or ideology-wide shared plan to fundamentally transform the nation.

    But my only beef is in equating them; I (generally*) agree that government has no right to be favoring certain businesses.

    *I was for the auto maker bailouts.

    • AFAIK ethanol subsidies are about individual representatives wanting to support business/jobs in their state, not about some party-wide or ideology-wide shared plan to fundamentally transform the nation.

      Sodomizing the market is sodomizing the market, whether it's a lone rapist or a gang bang.

      • Oh the effect on the market is definitely the same. It's just the intent is vastly more sinister in one case than the other. That was my beef with equating them. Kinda like killing someone. Yeah, whether involuntary manslaughter or first-degree murder, the victim is still dead. But that doesn't make one just as bad as the other.

        And it seems like a little government interference in the market is hardly the sodomizing of the market. Any more than a big corporation dumping pollution in a river is raping

        • Oh, come on. The Lefty "Judge me on my good intentions" plea is so passé. You look at the empirical result, you say: "It sucks", and you deal with it. Man up.

          • Along the lines of the "TL;DR" meme, for you I'm coining a new "TV;DU", for "too vague; didn't understand".

            • You said:

              It's just the intent is vastly more sinister in one case than the other.

              I'm not buying off on anyone's claim of better intentions.
              (a) Do the homework before jerking people around legislatively.
              (b) When the results are a turd, fix them.
              Crap like this is why conservatives have lost faith in the GOP, and don't bother showing up at election time.

              • It looks like a glass half-full/half-empty thing. I said the intentions of the D's are far, far worse (and therefore not equatable, on whole), and you heard me saying that the intentions of the R's is better. Well I guess relatively speaking that's true, but I wouldn't characterize it that way; "least-worst" if I had to.

                This whole dispute stemmed from your "[...] as ugly as anything the Dems do". Given our reality, that's not even possible. Just the whole gloomal warbling charade alone is a vastly bigge

                • Peace.

                • You are pitiful, and have no understanding of kabuki. You are the perfect illustration of the failure of majority rule.

                  It looks like a glass half-full/half-empty thing.

                  That only means the glass is twice the necessary size.

                  Oh yeah... I forget... I'm talking to the hand. Bet hey, you should know where to put the cork. Please press firmly.

      • Oh please! The only people capable of "sodomizing" the market are the people with the money to do it, and that is who any government represents. It is hired to manipulate the market for the protection of the interests of those who can afford it. You have no logical reason to differentiate government and business. But for trolling purposes, it definitely draws flies, just like dog poop. Your faux "opposition" still fails to impress, and it will dissipate once your faction is back in charge. Of that we can al

        • So you're a prophet, then?

          • No, I work with evidence. I don't believe in that voodoo that you do.

            • Liberty? Individual accountability? Fiscal sanity? Limited government?

              • Code words... They don't mean what you want me to think they mean. I am very familiar with the gag. d_r is much more willing to stay within the narrative you are trying to control. I am simply unable.

                • If I mean anything other than the plain, simple, obvious meaning of those words, then God damn me to hell. Where there may be some basis for your remark is that there are plenty of false flags flying these days.

                  • Your Bundy Rancher Gang has made the meaning of those words perfectly clear. You're simply repeating them from those sites you try to get us to take seriously. False flags originate in the political party in power (both factions) you support.

                    • Your Bundy Rancher Gang has made the meaning of those words perfectly clear.

                      So now you're holding me accountable for what some blokes across the continent are getting up to? How. . .just. . .of you.

                    • Just spelling out that you share the same views, including how you want to define the words. I don't know why you all are so afraid to say what you're really thinking. Attempting to obfuscate your feelings with weasel words only makes you look like... weasels. Personally I prefer to think you (and d_r, in his goofy fashion, from the "other" side) are trolling, staying right on the very edge. You're one of the better ones, I have to admit. You really could run for office and win an election or two. You're so

                    • What. Weasel. Words?

                      You really could run for office and win an election or two.

                      I could not possibly hold less interest in political power over others. I held some positional authority in the context of serving as a naval officer: power is best kept to a minimum, and passed before soiling. You know what I want? I would that everyone be their own damn President.

      • The only people being sodomized are the citizens, and that only happens because they are too damn submissive and brainwashed. Better to sodomize the market to stop it from sodomizing us with its puppet dictators in the government. What you are seeing is maturation/evolution of capitalism. It is working as intended and designed. This is the road to serfdom. You are wagging the dog.

        • What you are seeing is maturation/evolution of capitalism. It is working as intended and designed.

          That is a genuinely interesting theory. As long as you're begging the question, what is this overarching "intention" and who "designed" it? I don't understand how the basic buyer, marketplace, and seller objects within capitalism support your ideas.

          • The overriding intention is to "get the girl". That is the nature of the alpha male. It's not necessarily conscious. The old *lizard brain* still runs the show, even the one on your screen.

            • Not completely true (though still substantially so) in the Christian case.

              • There are no rich Christians. It can't happen. It's all right there in your bible.

                • You're welcome to demonstrate, yourself, where in the Bible that Christianity equates to a vow of poverty. Dare ya.

                  • Matt 19:24

                    • Go ahead and read the next two verses. And do keep in mind that, relative to the rest of the world, all Americans can be labeled "rich".
                      We need to be thankful for Matt 19:26 on, like, ALL levels.

                    • Is that supposed to justify the hedonism of wealth/power?

                    • Have you READ the Gospel, man? At what point did Jesus EVER justify "the hedonism of wealth/power"?
                      Flip over a couple of chapters to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_talents [wikipedia.org] in Matt 25. Talents, of course, were literal currency in those days, not our modern abstractions. Jesus is not only telling His servants to double their money; the parable explicitly crushes the oaf who, like a Democrat voter, sits on his loot & expects a handout.
                      But the subtle 10th Commandment point is that none of the

                    • like a Democrat voter

                      Heh, nice one.

                      Like d_r and I both have said, you are pure partisan. You destroy all credibility with that nonsense, blown it completely out of the water...

                    • Well, that was one way to avoid dealing with my point, I suppose.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Close