Money to be borrowed from China...news at 11.

"You think that's a lot, my friends? Well, you ain't seen nothin' yet, heh, heh, heh. I'm gonna up the ante to a cool $1B for the first Christian from a swing state who comes up with a perpetual motion machine. I may not know much about economics, but I'm hell on wheels, my friends, when it comes to perpetual motion."
~John "There's No Doll Like an Inflatable Doll" McCain

and 1 BRAZILLIAN dollars to whoever can bring old Osamer bin laden in fer justice!

$1.00 per person?

Well shit, there goes my Summer Gas Tax Holiday profits......

He giveth and he taketh away.

That Old Bastard.

Is he talking about a regular car battery or one that can actually power the whole car?

I personally have enough gas to power my lib neighbor's prius for a year

far surpasses existing technology.

Now that's an engineering criteria if I ever saw one.

Why I'll bet one of our large government contractors, will find a way to fit that bill, and probably do it by inventing the all new Lead Acid battery.

It's the same thing Bush did. Everything he has ever done is the same as Bush did.

It will be constructed out of baby seal fur and will take of super-tanker worth of petroleum products to produce just one and cost more than filling up that same super-tanker at the pump with regular-unleaded at 4.19/gallon.

The Arizona senator is also proposing stiffer fines for automakers who skirt existing fuel-efficiency standards, as well as incentives to increase use of domestic and foreign alcohol-based fuels such as ethanol.

That's along with the push to get a better energy source for our cars...

I wish McCain would spend 30 minutes in a tanning booth... a little more skin tone and you tools would have been all over this as the greatest ideas ever.

It would just exacerbate the liver spots.

It would just exacerbate the liver spots.

Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Anything to darken him up so you guys might listen a little...

Pretty good idea, IMO. (No, i'm not a McCain supporter). I wish he'd allow fuel cells to also qualify. It is pretty clear that the actual rules for this "contest" will be more specific--so lets no dog him for the details yet.

I'd rather heavily invest in a "manhattan project" for fuel cells--THAT would really help this country.

Question though--if we have electric cars, we still need the electricity which is another form of energy that will be a problem in the coming years (as it is, for the most part, presently generated by coal and natural gas plants).

It's the same thing Bush did. Everything he has ever done is the same as Bush did.

Posted by shirtsbyeric at

yep and we are well on our way to mars

I wish he'd allow fuel cells to also qualify.

I would hope so too... Actually I would hope nothing is excluded. If you can come up with a clean energy source for personal transportation, that is not significantly less in terms of speed and running time then I would hope it would be included in this "contest."

McCain is calling for more drilling here to increase our supplies, fines for not improving fuel efficiancy, calling for alternative fuel sources and incentives to do so, and even offering a very large amount of money for someone, or some company to invent a real alternative... What more do you guys want?

I love the idea, but I am not to optimistic about the outcome. Exxon and the other big oil compaines have been buying up battery cell technology for a long time to keep the technology off the market. Just look at the battery for the EV1...

What we need is a national push like we had for the race to the moon to develop alternative technology - batteries and mini-windmills in your backyard to recharge them perhaps. Or, a gas/electric hybrid like the Chevy Volt would be great - the Prius is a dead end idea but the Volt will be revolutionary. Either way, we need to keep the oil companies away from the research and IP...

McCain is calling for more drilling here to increase our supplies, fines for not improving fuel efficiancy, calling for alternative fuel sources and incentives to do so, and even offering a very large amount of money for someone, or some company to invent a real alternative... What more do you guys want?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

Twat more do aye want ? How's about him and his trollop trotting off into the sunset for starters,

Would 300 million do this? Make a large water pipeline from the pacific to Yuma Arizona (the sunniest city in the US). Make a massive solar farm there, whose electricity is used to convert the water to hydrogen gas and oxygen gas, which is compressed and sent out in trucks, powered by hydrogen.

We could do something similar on the east coast, but use wind power and wave power to do the conversion. The windiest city in the US is in Massachusetts.

We will never run out of water on the coasts, and we could make some pretty massive sources of clean energy.

As soon as hydrogen takes off as a power source for cars, people could use their own wind and solar machines to do the same type of conversion on water themselves. Wide spread distribution and decentralization could then happen as we have the ability in our homes to fuel our vehicles, which would make us very energy independent, and a lot cleaner too.

"McCain is calling for more drilling here to increase our supplies, fines for not improving fuel efficiancy, calling for alternative fuel sources and incentives to do so, and even offering a very large amount of money for someone, or some company to invent a real alternative... What more do you guys want?"

I want these oil companies to FULLY exploit the leases they have before they start getting other land to drill. I don't want to destroy our waters and our parks for a half million barrels of oil per day (that won't make a difference at the pump). I also want a manhattan project to research the shit out of alternative, renewable energy. We need to get the technology, make it commercially viable and then make sure the country is ready, willing and able to shift over our infrastructure to implement this new technology.

I drove a green VW for two years in the 1970's.
Does that count?

(Dang! I loved that little bug.)

(that won't make a difference at the pump).

None of this stuff will in the short term...

But if car companies have to improve their mileage standards, and our oil needs are severely cut because there is an alternative for our vehicles, and there are alternatives to oil/gas, maybe then in a few years half a million barrels a day will help.

there are no real short term solutions to this problem... everything is years off.

Add 4 dollar tax to every gallon and use part of that money to give tax reduction for commuters : 1 dollar a mile.

Why would we listen to McCain Rob?

Who do you thing we are? The Vietcong?

Add 4 dollar tax to every gallon and use part of that money to give tax reduction for commuters : 1 dollar a mile.

Posted by fribo

You chose to live in the suburbs-- why don't you pay your own way into the city?

I live in a city with quality public transportation and live close to work-- shouldn't I get the tax break since I pay for your highways?

But will GM, Exxon and the rest of the Capitalist Gang of Thugs let this stand? GM crushed those cars for a reason. Maintenance and Oil Revenues were at stake. We're talking trillions.

I think another help would be offer incentives to employers who allow their employees to work from home at least part of the week... I save a ton on gas and tolls and such being able to work from a few days a month... And those days I'm in the office, I always think about how just about everyone there could get all their work done from home...

Wasnt there a thread about a battery that ran up to 1000 miles on a charge not long ago?

Too bad that doddering can't be harnessed for perpetual motion- McCain could provide energy for the whole country for what, eight or nine more years?

We could do something similar on the east coast, but use wind power and wave power to do the conversion. The windiest city in the US is in Massachusetts.

Posted by bigjohn_1972 at 2008-06-23 01:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yup.

Blue Hill, MA

Here's the list:

10 windiest cities according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are:
1...Blue Hill MA
2...Dodge City KS
3...Amarillo TX
4...Rochester MN
5...Cheyenne WY
6...Caspar Wy
7...Great Falls MT
8...Goodland KS
9...Boston MA
10...Lubbock TX

We could do something similar on the east coast, but use wind power and wave power to do the conversion. The windiest city in the US is in Massachusetts.

Posted by bigjohn_1972 at 2008-06-23 01:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

BigJohn, Which city is that? I'm from Massachusetts and was curious so I goggled it and it says Doge City KS is the windiest city in the US.

Which one did you hear was the windiest in MA? Was it on the Cape?

Thanks.

Forget that 3:22 post.....

Teddy already nixed the idea of wind power with the mills off the coast of MA--too unsightly.

Obama is a defeatist--can't do anything now except tax the oil companies--that will really drive down the price--don't ya' think?

Now the news is telling us that if we fill up in Mexico it will hurt our cars.

"None of this stuff will in the short term..."

I'm not talking about short/long term impact. I'm talking impact PERIOD. When we're talking about and increase of 500k barrels per day (at peak), that doesn't cause a BLIP on the radar. Unless we raided all of our natural parks, we're not going to do much to help. When you do a cost benefit analysis--i just don't think we should be risking the destruction of our national parks and coastlines for minimal amounts of oil.

Personally, i think the only short term gain we can achieve now is to crack down on the futures trading.

I want these oil companies to FULLY exploit the leases they have before they start getting other land to drill. I don't want to destroy our waters and our parks for a half million barrels of oil per day (that won't make a difference at the pump). I also want a manhattan project to research the shit out of alternative, renewable energy. We need to get the technology, make it commercially viable and then make sure the country is ready, willing and able to shift over our infrastructure to implement this new technology.

Posted by __b__

Which fields with enough oil for drilling and production to be economical are NOT being developed???

Kudos to McCain for this... I just hope he adds some stringent OBJECTIVE criteria to determine IF and WHEN we get a winner.

You chose to live in the suburbs-- why don't you pay your own way into the city?
I live in a city with quality public transportation and live close to work-- shouldn't I get the tax break since I pay for your highways?

Actually in the current system with cheap gas you pay much more for the supporting infrastructur than in my proposed system with high taxes on gas.

Hell for 25 Bucks I can buy a can of the greenest latex paint and paint a car battery green. So if I do this I get a cool 300 Million?? Awesome dude.

Larry Mohr

Someguy--

There are tons of "idle" leases in the some 68 million acres of oil leases throughout this country. To be perfectly honest, there is some word that many of the leases deemed "idle" aren't in fact idle, but are in the exploration/pre-development phase. I'm sure the truth is somewhere in between.

Someguy--

There are tons of "idle" leases in the some 68 million acres of oil leases throughout this country. To be perfectly honest, there is some word that many of the leases deemed "idle" aren't in fact idle, but are in the exploration/pre-development phase. I'm sure the truth is somewhere in between.

Posted by __b__

If it's ECONOMICAL to drill and produce on a particular lease, then odds are the oil companies are already doing so or are "exploring".

When you hear dems say, "Big Oil won't even produce on the land we've leased them" then run for the hills because those dems who say that aren't being genuine.

The way oil and gas leases ***typically*** work (based on my understanding) is the lessor (in this case the government) gets an upfront payment for the lease (called a bonus) from the lessee (e.g., an oil and gas company) and the oil company's lease is valid for some period of stated time PLUS however long they continue to develop oil and gas.

So, the government has been compensated upfront by oil and gas companies through bonus payments. Now, if the lessee (i.e., an oil and gas company) fails to produce on that particular lease, they'll LOSE the lease automatically and the land returns to the government (the lessor). There is likely ONLY one reason oil or gas would NOT be produced: it's not economical.

On the other hand, if oil and gas is produced, the government will earn a royalty and the oil and gas company will get to keep the lease so long as oil or gas is produced.

DON'T LET THE DEMS FOOL YOU!!! "Idle" land likely equals land with not enough oil and/or gas to be economical to develop.

OMG - Someguy2: You win Moron of the Day.

The whole damn problem of oil exploration is that the companies have been begging for years to get the price of oil up. This way they could stockpile profit and return it to the field to get at the more-expensive-to-drill oil. Well, they have had GROSS PROFITS like never before. And I mean really gross. So why aren't they turning that back into the harder to get-at oil fields? Because they have no intention of drilling. It's about sheer and unadultrated greed BEFORE Bush and Co (McSame included) are tossed out of their jobs and sensible energy policy comes about.

Your republican pipe-dream of getting at Anwar and the coastal waters is not just a pipe-dream. It is a Crack-Pipe dream. Now stop reiterating information you rip off of the Limbaugh show.

"...I think another help would be offer incentives to employers who allow their employees to work from home at least part of the week...Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole"

AND

"...a little more skin tone and you tools would have been all over this as the greatest ideas ever..."

AND

"...Anything to darken him up so you guys might listen a little..."

So, not only are you a real honest to goodness Bigot (really? Go figure...)

But your idea is about as original as the same one ushered into corporations about 12 years ago. Where have you been?

What is really the bug's guts is that you have the nerve to recommend ANY KIND of clean-enviroment advice at all.

Since when did self-deludded little dick-head republican puppet boys actually give a shit about the environment?

You guys LOOOVE your Hummers and your SUVS and Monster Trucks. And ain't NO ONE GONNA TELL YOU HOW/WHEN or WHERE to Drive. NO ONE.

Remember that little Mantra from the republican party?

Maybe your RNC talking points have changed in hopes of skimming off a few independents from "That little Brown Man?"

Ain't going to work, boy: Obama holds a 17% lead over McSame in the national polls this week.

BWAHAHAHAHA

Someguy--i read the article which was why i acknowledged that it isn't nearly as bad as i've heard from some. I'm very familiar with oil and gas leases (i'm an attorney who does quite a bit of real estate work and these leases show up OFTEN).

But, as i've seen with every situation thus far---there are at least two sides to each issue and the truth is somewhere IN BETWEEN. I wish each side could be honest with their arguments. It would be a lot easier to make informed, rational, logical decisions.

Instead of abandoning the concept all together, i think there is some merit in the argument--but we need to properly tailor the "exploitation requirement" so it doesn't unneccessarily pick up leases that aren't truely "idle".

Yeahyeahyeah, big bucks, big dreams, big deal.

What pisses me off is that nobody's doing anything now, and there is plenty that could be done. Some of it would actually save gas, and some of it would impress upon the mindless that there really is a problem.

1- Reinstate the 55 mph speed limit.
2- Impose a gas-guzzler tax that is life-of-the-car, not a one-shot deal folded into the purchase price.
3- Require (and fund) local efforts to maintain public transportation in a user-friendly condition, with decent service and good security.
4- Go after hidden waste, like drive-throughs at fast-food joints.
5- Require (and fund) local efforts to time traffic controls in ways that smooth traffic flow and eliinate as much idling as possible.
6- Give tax and/or other incentives to promote telecommuting with employers.
7- Raise the cost of speeding tickets to the upper stratosphere. If it's not high enough to make someone miss a house payment, it's not high enough to make some of the high-roller assholes out there stop and think.
8- Require proof of annual maintenance on fuel and ignition systems at the time of tag purchase, the way that emissions proof is required in most urban areas now.
9- Require employers to stagger opening and closing hours to reduce rush-hour congestion and idling.
10- If things really get tough, ration gas. The mindset which that measure imposed on WWII-era consumers worked wonders in convincing people that their efforts really were necessary to getting America through a rough patch.

Not one of these things will be done, of course.

Stanford Oshevky's battery provided 160 mile range and lasted the life of the car, 10-20 years. GM's original battery lasted about one year.

OMG - Someguy2: You win Moron of the Day.

The whole damn problem of oil exploration is that the companies have been begging for years to get the price of oil up. This way they could stockpile profit and return it to the field to get at the more-expensive-to-drill oil. Well, they have had GROSS PROFITS like never before. And I mean really gross. So why aren't they turning that back into the harder to get-at oil fields? Because they have no intention of drilling. It's about sheer and unadultrated greed BEFORE Bush and Co (McSame included) are tossed out of their jobs and sensible energy policy comes about.

Your republican pipe-dream of getting at Anwar and the coastal waters is not just a pipe-dream. It is a Crack-Pipe dream. Now stop reiterating information you rip off of the Limbaugh show.

Posted by Dumpling1

Actually in the current system with cheap gas you pay much more for the supporting infrastructur than in my proposed system with high taxes on gas.

Posted by fribo

...Oh, I'm well aware of my taxes funding your front yard desires. I just think you all should pay more on gas taxes and I and other people who live and work in dense urban areas who take transit (or bike or walk) should reap the benefits with 1) free transit 2) subsidized housing when living in dense, mixed-use, mixed-income housing near transit 3) better bike lanes and sidewalks 4) subsidies for community gardens/rooftop gardens to localize our economies.

You got your break-- you bought a house and received a subsidized loan, a 'first home buyer' loan, and you drove until you qualified for the price of the size of the home you wanted. Now you want to bitch that your daily commute is too expensive-- but you saved that $30,000 on your home closing price by going to far off suburb...

"Big Oil has been begging for years for the price of oil to go up??? I ***hope*** any seller of a product hopes their product's price goes up!!! Wow -- great point!"

It isn't as bad of a point as you're trying to make it. Look of Price Elasticity of Demand. Gas has LOTS OF IT.

__b__, I'm not sure I follow you (I'm not an economist =). I was saying that OF COURSE Big Oil wants higher oil prices. Implicit in my statement is high prices right to the point before it reaches a "tipping point" where demand reductions result in a decrease in profit margins. I don't think they've reached that point.

But anyway, Big Oil doesn't control oil prices. And in any event, it's contradictory to argue that Big Oil wants high oil prices AND once achieved do NOT want to increase domestic production... provided the domestic production does NOT result in a great decrease in the price of oil. In other words, if oil prices are high and the product is produced domestically, Big Oil will earn higher margins while the government earns a royalty and consumers get some price reduction. Big Oil still wins, but so do consumers and the government.

Exxon and the other big oil compaines have been buying up battery cell technology for a long time to keep the technology off the market.

Posted by Jacque_Strap at 2008-06-23 01:02 PM | Reply

yeah man, and I like heard about this guy who built a carbureator that got 250 miles on a gallon of grape Kool-Aide, man.

And Exxon paid him like $10 million dollars for it man, and before he could like cash the check he got killed, man

Vernon, stop Bogarting that joint.

I wish McCain would spend 30 minutes in a tanning booth... a little more skin tone and you tools would have been all over this as the greatest ideas ever.

No, Rob, that would not have done it. However, if Saint B.O. or another democrat had come up with the idea, these leftie knee-jerk jerks would then have been all over it like a chicken on a June bug.

Sheeple are so boringly predictible

And let's be honest, Goatboob, if this WAS Obama's idea, you would have been ripping it all day long. Well, except for the times when you were having endless, pointless discussions with Larry. Oh yeah, and also except for the time when you were having endless, pointless discussions with BBob.

And let's be honest, Goatboob, if this WAS Obama's idea, you would have been ripping it all day long.

Nope, not true. In fact I have never ripped anything Obama has come up with and I challenge you to present a post of mine where I have.

Oh, you can't? What a surprise, m'boor. You only underscore your status as a knee-jerk jerk by saying things like that.

You may now rejoin your flock. I think it's spoon feeding time

Drats! Foiled again! You are a clever one, Mr. Goatmamboob. You know that I will not be able to find such a post, because you fancy having 100+ post arguments about nothing with Larry and BBob. it would take me weeks to wade through all that crap. Therefore, you win!

Good cop out, m'boor.

But you are correct on at least one point...

You know that I will not be able to find such a post

...just for the wrong reasons. The correct reason is because such a post does not exist.

If you like, I'd be glad to give you some tips on searching text and finding specifics that would allow to zero in on certain posts, though. It's easier than you think

I'll take you up on that, Goatboob. Tell me how to find a post where the writer takes a negative view of an idea or proposal made by someone else, say Obama for instance.

I'll take you up on that, Goatboob. Tell me how to find a post where the writer takes a negative view of an idea or proposal made by someone else, say Obama for instance.

I can't be as specific as to hunt for specific views, of course, but when looking on a page with a lot of posts such as my user page, do [alt] e, the f and in the box put "obama", then indicate whether you want to search from the beginning of the text (down) or the bottom (up). In the case you want, this would eliminate the posts between me and Larry or bOoB since Obama has never been the topic there.

There are also more complex searches that use 'or' and 'and' and 'not' and multiple word phrase criteria. When you master this first lesson, we'll move on to lesson #2. Let me know when you are ready.

This from the candidate that wants the oil companies to get more land leases they won't use.

Did anyone catch MTP this past weekend? Brian Williams hosted, and Joe Biden OWNED Lindsey Graham. Evidently Graham just a few years ago said more offshore drilled was a terrible idea, and used $4 gas as an excuse to reverse his position. Biden countered with the fact that of the close to 50 million acres that are currently leased to oil companies for offshore drilling, only 20 million is actually being explored or is currently producing.

Why do oil companies need more territory opened up if they're not drilling or pumping in space they've already leased? Joe hit it right on the head. Because they want to squeeze in more leases before Bush's term ends, because they know the next president (Obama) won't give them any more leases.

On another note, it infuriates me to no end when oil companies put a commercial on TV touting themselves as "energy companies" that are researching (and producing, yuk yuk...) alternative energy sources such as get this. COAL AND NATURAL GAS!!!

Last time I checked, the term "alternative energy source" implied something other then fossil fuels. Forget oil rigs off our shores, start putting windmill rigs offshore...

But Teddy doesn't want them off his coast.

DD - I believe you are partially correct. We need to use all energy sources available until a replacement is found for the internal combustion engine - nuke, wind, water, solar, geo..... But it is going to take longer than 10-15 years to replace everyones vehicle even after an acceptable new power source is developed. Get us off foreign oil as soon as possible. Lets not say now what some already say about Carters words - if we had only done it then.

just look at all of the libs talking about how WE CANT DO THIS......sure glad you werent around when jfk talked about how we COULD get to the moon
or the founders talked about how we COULD seperate from the king and have our own country.....
libs two mantras are GIVE ME GIVE ME GIVE ME

and WE CANT DO THAT WE CANT DO THAT WE CANT DO THAT....

and at least mccain has a plan for something. all obama and his dem bros REALLY WANT are prices to remain as high as possible.
I will give good odds that IF he is elected, THEN prices will be a problem..........

NUTCASE:

Who is "Oshevky"? I did a wikipedia search - nothing. I did a google search - YOUR post came up.

Care to let us in on who this person or group is? Or are you making shit up again. (observation - not a questions really)

This battery already exists and is sitting on a shelve in the sub-basement somewhere in Exon-Mobile or at GMAC. The oil and car companies have been working hand in hand over the years to maximize there profits and keep the internal combustion engine at a beginner level while we went to the moon 40 years ago, reveloutionized brain surgery and brought about the computer and internet. And your telling me they couldnt have developed an engine that could get 200 mpg or something else we could be driving. Its greed and if you think your gona stop it, no way. They will kill to to keep what they have and they already have.

This from the candidate that wants the oil companies to get more land leases they won't use.

Did anyone catch MTP this past weekend? Brian Williams hosted, and Joe Biden OWNED Lindsey Graham. Evidently Graham just a few years ago said more offshore drilled was a terrible idea, and used $4 gas as an excuse to reverse his position. Biden countered with the fact that of the close to 50 million acres that are currently leased to oil companies for offshore drilling, only 20 million is actually being explored or is currently producing.

$4/gallon is a good reason to want offshore drilling. Yep, and they're NEVER going to drill on land that is not economical to drill and produce. Biden is playing games.

Why do oil companies need more territory opened up if they're not drilling or pumping in space they've already leased?

Because much of the space they have leased either isn't economical to produce or doesn't have oil and gas. Oil and gas is a speculator's game... before leasing oil companies have ZERO right to perform geological studies to see if oil and/or gas is actually under the surface. Such geological surveys are valuable and NOT free. Furthermore, why would a landowner EVER allow such geological surveying PRIOR to leasing??? Think about it, if the geological study shows NOTHING under the land then the landowner will get NOTHING but the fee to allow the geological survey. This is why landowners typically lease the land NOT knowing if there is oil and gas under the ground. Oil and gas companies speculate that oil and gas MAY be there and sign a lease. If they're wrong, they lose the initial payment they made for the lease and the lease after so many years.

Joe hit it right on the head. Because they want to squeeze in more leases before Bush's term ends, because they know the next president (Obama) won't give them any more leases.

So Biden is saying Obama won't lease unused government lands to oil and gas companies??? That's an odd position and I bet Obama would disagree with that -- but heck, it makes a great sound bite because not many know how the oil and gas leases work.

On another note, it infuriates me to no end when oil companies put a commercial on TV touting themselves as "energy companies" that are researching (and producing, yuk yuk...) alternative energy sources such as get this. COAL AND NATURAL GAS!!!

Name me ONE Big Oil company that does NOT invest in alternative energy sources. And by alternative energy, I do mean other than fossil fuels.

Last time I checked, the term "alternative energy source" implied something other then fossil fuels. Forget oil rigs off our shores, start putting windmill rigs offshore...

Windmills are a good option, but they won't solve the problem. I think the best approach is a piecemeal approach of bundling multiple technologies and, of course, including existing technology such as fossil fuels and coal.

Posted by ddenton

They will kill to to keep what they have and they already have.

Posted by JoeLabey at 2008-06-23 10:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

can you give an example of this. I am interested to know who they killed to keep fossil fuel cars going..........

and I by no means want to sound like rodney king, but why cant we all agree that no ONE thing will get us off the middle eastern teet when it comes to gas....
dont we need to drill more......and dont give me the stuff about how many acres they have already because there are millions of acres where they FOUND NO OIl, and libs include this but dont tell anyone.......

that we need to give whatever incentives needed to develop new kinds. IT CAN BE DONE>......and if oil companies are in the way.....GET THEM OUT OF THE WAY.......

texas is the largest wind power state in the country and still its not enough.....and places like mass wont use those anyway.....

and conservation.....every time I stay at home instead of drive somewhere, I think that some shiek in saudi arabia may have to sell one of his many limos to make up for it.
but you know......I wonder how many independent truckers are not able to even put gas in the truck and their only way to conserve may be to lose money.........

Nice idea. Shame he isn't a Senator, he could have proposed this a long time ago. Oh yeah, that's right...

I don't think he wants to go down the road of what things cost divided by the population of the US. $300 Million isn't that much after all, it's nothing like the $500 Billion we've already spent in Bush's Iraq, or the next $500 Billion we'll have to spend if he becomes president.

Argh,

Just curious -- who is it that authorizes funding for the war?

Why that would be Congress. The same Congress that was controlled by the Republican Part for 10 years, during which this confused clusterfuck was launched and financed.

I know you want to imply that now the Democrats are in power, it's all their fault, and nothing the Republicans did in getting us to this point matters. Well, as is often pointed out when the topic of withdrawal comes up, we're in so deep in this shitstorm it's not as easy to get out as it sounds.

But don't mistake acknowledging that fact for complicity, or justification of the policy. George W. Bush, and the Republican Party that put him in office and never questioned a word of his glorious judgement, are wholly responsible for this mess. They painted the rest of the country into a corner, with only bad and worse options. Choosing one or the other isn't support for the war, it's just doing the hard work of cleaning up after the incompetent and corrupt.

I like the idea.. batteries are the stumbling block to electric cars.. IF we had a battery that would allow cars to travel significant distances between charging, AND would charge quickly, AND was lightweight.. no-one would want to drive an internal combustion engine.

Think about this.. who want want a gasoline engine running their refrigerator? Electric motors have efficiencies in the high 90 percent.. (98% is common) while gasoline and diesel engines are in the 30's..

Electric motors are easily controlled, can use regenerative braking, and would be much safer.

The hold up is the battery.. Obama should join McCain in this.. it's a great idea.

As long as it isn't the same green as his backdrop. That was just nasty.

PS The battery has been developed-its just a problem of making it cost effective both new and when replaced.