Obama Under Secret Service Protection

[southsider2k5]

I read that article, and I like what I see. Why the crucifiction? He asks for them to use flex fuel, his campaign car uses flex fuel too.

 

It just amazes me how fear-driven and petty this anti-environmental wave among the GOP is. Gore, Obama, anyone else... if they aren't 100% perfect in their own "green" behavior, then how dare they actually try to make the world better.

 

It would sure be nice if people were willing to deal with the issue, instead of picking on petty little crap in order to destroy firgureheads. John McCain has been a supporter of the current Iraq War policies (for the most part), but, he also pushed for an anti-torture bill. So is his anti-torture effort trash because he endorses Bush's policy that results in torture itself? No. Similarly, when Obama says he'd like the USSS to use slightly greener vehicles, do we throw away that effort by pointing out that his old, personal car (which he probably rarely drives) isn't environmentally ideal?

 

Its all driven by fear. Democrats fear supporting McCain's effort against torture because god forbid they align with someone who supports the war. Republicans fear supporting him because god forbid that makes them seem weak (nevermind that torture is itself an act of cowardice). Here, Republicans fear embracing any efforts at environmental improvements lest they look like they may have been wrong before, or that they look bad for supporting a typically Democratic ideal.

 

Amazing. People posted after the Dem debate that none of the candidates flew green. Now, a candidate tries to go a little more green, and he is evil. Clearly, for some people, individuals in the "other" party (whichever one that might be) can't win no matter what they do.

 

Its not evil, its just do as I say, not as I do. Its always easier to point the finger at someone else, than to make the adjustments yourself. People have no problems pointing it out when our President contradicts himself, but god forbid it happen to one of the golden boys.

[BigSqwert]

I just came accross this... Not only does he want the secret service to use them, he does not own one himself. I guess its cool to be green as long as someone else is paying for it.

This is a non-issue IMO. Petty to the umpth degree.

[NorthSideSox72]

Its not evil, its just do as I say, not as I do. Its always easier to point the finger at someone else, than to make the adjustments yourself. People have no problems pointing it out when our President contradicts himself, but god forbid it happen to one of the golden boys.

Where are you getting this? Whose golden boy?

 

And its not a double standard. If you look at 100 things you do that aren't environmentally friendly, and seek to change 50% of those, are you a hypocrite? Absolutely not. In fact, anyone who says they have done 100% of what they can in ANY effort (environmental impact, or even just trying to be a better person) is full of crap. Not possible.

 

I don't see Obama going around telling people they are evil for owning older cars that aren't fuel efficient. If he did say that, and he owned, one, THEN its a double standard. In which case, fire away. But as it is, he says his campaign is using flex fuel cars (not sure the %), and he asks his USSS detail to do the same, but he hasn't replaced his own beater yet. No double standard there.

[southsider2k5]

Where are you getting this? Whose golden boy?

 

And its not a double standard. If you look at 100 things you do that aren't environmentally friendly, and seek to change 50% of those, are you a hypocrite? Absolutely not. In fact, anyone who says they have done 100% of what they can in ANY effort (environmental impact, or even just trying to be a better person) is full of crap. Not possible.

 

I don't see Obama going around telling people they are evil for owning older cars that aren't fuel efficient. If he did say that, and he owned, one, THEN its a double standard. In which case, fire away. But as it is, he says his campaign is using flex fuel cars (not sure the %), and he asks his USSS detail to do the same, but he hasn't replaced his own beater yet. No double standard there.

 

Nope none at all... forget I mentioned it.

[SleepyWhiteSox]

Kinda related so I'll just add it here, I guess.

 

CBSNews.com Turns Off Comments on Obama Stories

Posted by Brian Montopoli

 

 

(AP Photo)Today CBSNews.com informed its staff via email that they should no longer enable comments on stories about presidential candidate Barack Obama. The reason for the new policy, according to the email, is that stories about Obama have been attracting too many racist comments.

 

"It's very simple," Mike Sims, director of News and Operations for CBSNews.com, told me. "We have our Rules of Engagement. They prohibit personal attacks, especially racist attacks. Stories about Obama have been problematic, and we won't tolerate it."

 

CBSNews.com does sometimes delete comments on an individual basis, but Sims said that was not sufficient in the case of Obama stories due to "the volume and the persistence" of the objectionable comments.

 

There has been a fierce debate about how news outlets should handle reader comments. Washingtonpost.com's Jim Brady, whose site, like CBSNews.com, does not have the resources to filter comments in advance, told Howard Kurtz that he'd "rather figure out a way to do it better than not to do it at all."

 

But Post reporter Darryl Fears told Kurtz that comments should be eliminated if they can't be pre-screened for offensiveness.

 

"If you're an African American and you read about someone being called a porch monkey, that overrides any positive thing that you would read in the comments," he said.

 

CBSNews.com has no plans to disable comments on stories about the other presidential candidates, according to Sims. As for comments on Obama stories, he said the site is open to eventually bringing them back.

 

"We'd like to be able to return to them, and I'm not ruling that out," said Sims. "But at this point it's not possible."

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/05/04/pu...ry2761854.shtml

[EvilMonkey]

I just thought it was a pretty stupid request purely for his safety reasons. If some nutbag starts shooting at him, does he really want the secret service rushing him off into a Prius instead of an armored SUV? If they armor the prius, you would be lucky if the thing could even move!

[Rex Kickass]

They do make hybrid SUVs by the way.

 

Obama has been attracting crowds upwards of 20,000 in some cases. Hillary isn't even getting that big a crowd at the moment - so its probably warranted in Barack's case.

[southsider2k5]

They do make hybrid SUVs by the way.

 

Obama has been attracting crowds upwards of 20,000 in some cases. Hillary isn't even getting that big a crowd at the moment - so its probably warranted in Barack's case.

 

Hillary already has secret service protection as the former first lady.

[Texsox]

Small steps by everyone makes more of an impact than nitpicking a few people. Let's all applaud Bush, on vacation he rides a horse. I believe the environmental impact on a horse is better than any hybrid.

[Balta1701]

Small steps by everyone makes more of an impact than nitpicking a few people. Let's all applaud Bush, on vacation he rides a horse. I believe the environmental impact on a horse is better than any hybrid.

Methane is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2.

[EvilMonkey]

They do make hybrid SUVs by the way.

But armored SUV's? I would assume that the secret service already has the current SUV's in available for use. So, would Obama be willing to pay for the new vehicle(s) for his detail, or is that an expense he wants to stick the taxpayers with?

[Texsox]

But armored SUV's? I would assume that the secret service already has the current SUV's in available for use. So, would Obama be willing to pay for the new vehicle(s) for his detail, or is that an expense he wants to stick the taxpayers with?

Better question, should the government be buying greener vehicles, buiildings, anyways?

[StrangeSox]

But armored SUV's? I would assume that the secret service already has the current SUV's in available for use. So, would Obama be willing to pay for the new vehicle(s) for his detail, or is that an expense he wants to stick the taxpayers with?

 

Democrats got ripped up and down by right-wingers for flying in to their debates. Now, one is taking a step to make his campaign "greener" and he's getting ripped up and down for it by right-wingers.

[kapkomet]

Democrats got ripped up and down by right-wingers for flying in to their debates. Now, one is taking a step to make his campaign "greener" and he's getting ripped up and down for it by right-wingers.

No, they didn't get ripped up and down for flying to their debates, they got ripped up and down for yelling at me about my SUV and telling me I have to change MY lifestyle without changing their own.

[Balta1701]

No, they didn't get ripped up and down for flying to their debates, they got ripped up and down for yelling at me about my SUV and telling me I have to change MY lifestyle without changing their own.

And then they try to change their lifestyle...and get ripped for it.

[BigSqwert]

No, they didn't get ripped up and down for flying to their debates, they got ripped up and down for yelling at me about my SUV and telling me I have to change MY lifestyle without changing their own.

Which candidate yelled at you and your SUV and additionally told you to change your lifestyle? Please provide some links or quotes.

Edited May 8, 2007 by BigSqwert

[Texsox]

As long as we continue to hold all leaders accountable, that's a good thing. When they are on the correct path they should be praised, not condemned.

 

Small steps by everyone makes a greater impact than one person being 100% green.

[EvilMonkey]

Where have I ripped him for trying to be green? I said I thought his request that the secret service drive green to be a stupid one for safety reasons. Sure they make hybrid SUV's, but if my safety was an issue, i don't care how many damn dionasaurs they have to burn up to get me outta there, just do it! Tex brought up the question, 'should the government be driving green?'. Well, sure, why not? When the current vehicles are due for replacement, green should be a big consideration. But if the currently do NOT have armored hybrid SUV's to guard Obama with, will he pay for it, or should the taxpayers foot a special expense because he wants to look good? Hell, if the DO have armored hybrid SUV's, are they as good as the non-hybrid ones? Can they go as fast as they may need to with all that extra weight? Are they as safe?

[Texsox]

Where have I ripped him for trying to be green? I said I thought his request that the secret service drive green to be a stupid one for safety reasons. Sure they make hybrid SUV's, but if my safety was an issue, i don't care how many damn dionasaurs they have to burn up to get me outta there, just do it! Tex brought up the question, 'should the government be driving green?'. Well, sure, why not? When the current vehicles are due for replacement, green should be a big consideration. But if the currently do NOT have armored hybrid SUV's to guard Obama with, will he pay for it, or should the taxpayers foot a special expense because he wants to look good? Hell, if the DO have armored hybrid SUV's, are they as good as the non-hybrid ones? Can they go as fast as they may need to with all that extra weight? Are they as safe?

 

I think we are responding to different issues and getting mixed up.

 

I believe we should be using existing vehicles as much as possible, and if we are buying armored vehicles, performance outweighs any green consideration. It is also not "green" to replace perfectly working vehicles and sending them to the masher. Postal vehicles, etc. should be as green as we can.

[EvilMonkey]

I think we are responding to different issues and getting mixed up.

 

I believe we should be using existing vehicles as much as possible, and if we are buying armored vehicles, performance outweighs any green consideration. It is also not "green" to replace perfectly working vehicles and sending them to the masher. Postal vehicles, etc. should be as green as we can.

Hell is getting colder, because I agree with that.

[Rex Kickass]

Where have I ripped him for trying to be green? I said I thought his request that the secret service drive green to be a stupid one for safety reasons. Sure they make hybrid SUV's, but if my safety was an issue, i don't care how many damn dionasaurs they have to burn up to get me outta there, just do it! Tex brought up the question, 'should the government be driving green?'. Well, sure, why not? When the current vehicles are due for replacement, green should be a big consideration. But if the currently do NOT have armored hybrid SUV's to guard Obama with, will he pay for it, or should the taxpayers foot a special expense because he wants to look good? Hell, if the DO have armored hybrid SUV's, are they as good as the non-hybrid ones? Can they go as fast as they may need to with all that extra weight? Are they as safe?

 

Actually hybrid cars have quite good acceleration and performance on average. In some cases, better than regular cars. Note that Obama actually referred to FlexFuel vehicles - like cars that can run on E85, for example.

[EvilMonkey]

Actually hybrid cars have quite good acceleration and performance on average. In some cases, better than regular cars. Note that Obama actually referred to FlexFuel vehicles - like cars that can run on E85, for example.

I thought that the E85 was really a load of crap, with the lower mpg from it and the expenditure of fuel just to make it? I know politically it sounds great, but is it really that good of an alternative? (serious questions)

[Texsox]

Hell is getting colder, because I agree with that.

 

It seems like an obvious concept to me. But I don't demand perfection. I know that my impact will be less than most any politician running for office. When I had one of my businesses, I needed a huge, fuel guzzling 10 cylinder truck to tow my equipment. When I sold the business, I threw in the truck, as much as I loved that Texas size, get out of my way, hybrid threatening, truck, I couldn't drive it in good conscious. Was I less green before or after, I don't think so.

[Balta1701]

I thought that the E85 was really a load of crap, with the lower mpg from it and the expenditure of fuel just to make it? I know politically it sounds great, but is it really that good of an alternative? (serious questions)

So, these are incredibly complex questions, and honestly, there really isn't that great of an answer to them yet. The fact is, producing ethanol from corn is a fairly inefficient process. If you were to take away all of the subsidies for ethanol and all of the laws requiring its usage, there would be very little reason for the U.S. to produce ethanol at all; getting the energy from oil is vastly cheaper.

 

The important question though is...how much of an energy benefit does one gain by harvesting corn and turning it into ethanol, and honestly, I don't know what the answer is, because I have seen people make claims on both sides depending on what their bias is. It takes a lot of energy to harvest corn and refine it into ethanol, and that cuts back on the value of it. The main argument in favor of building up an ethanol industry which makes sense to me is that it is being done so that if a better means of producing ethanol, perhaps from something like switchgrass, comes along, it can be implemented on a larger scale more rapidly once the technology is in place.

 

One of the big reasons that E-85 has become popular is that it is a nice marketing gimmick. If I understand the story correctly, about a decade ago, the automakers were able to get a loophole inserted in some fuel efficiency law that allowed them to avoid having to clean up their cars in other ways if they made cars capable of running on flex-fuels, like E-85. My Civic can't run ethanol, because ethanol can degrade certain types of parts over time. So they made a few cheap alterations to the vehicles to get under those rules, and it turned out that in the last year or two, the auto companies realized they could market that as a benefit to sell more vehicles once Congress mandated increasing ethanol production.

[Rex Kickass]

E-85 does burn cleaner, no?