TEAM OBAMA WARNS OF A ‘PAINFUL’ FUTURE FOR THE MANUFACTURING AND ENERGY SECTORS IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. OBAMA’S RECENT COMMENTS ON BANKRUPTING THE COAL INDUSTRY, BY OUTRAGEOUS TAXES, SUGGEST THE COAL-RUST BELT TO BE AN EARLY CASUALITY OF OBAMA’S ENERGY PLAN. OBAMA SAYS, IN ELOQUENT RHETORIC, HE IS TRYING TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT. HOWEVER, WHEN THE OPPORTUNITY EMERGES TO ENACT LEGISLATION TO CLEAN UP FOSSIL FUELS, OBAMA VOTES AGAINST THE PLANS. THIS LEAVES THE COAL INDUSTRY IN AN INESCAPABLE PREDICTIMENT SHOULD OBAMA EMERGE AS PRESIDENT: THEY WILL HAVE TO CAPTURE 100% OF CO2 EMISSIONS, BUT OBAMA IS AGAINST LEGISLATION THAT WOULD GET THEM CLOSER TO THE MARK. THIS BEHAVIOR IS NOT ONLY CONTRADICTORY, BUT SUSPECT. A LOOK AT OBAMA’S DONORS TURNS UP INDIVIDUALS WITH OUTSPOKEN AND SHARED INTEREST IN THE ‘GREEN- ENERGY’ INDUSTRY. COULD OBAMA’S ERRATIC ENERGY POLICY BE AN INDICATION HIS ENERGY POLICY IS TIED TO HIS DONORS AND SUPPORTERS?
The first indication something is amiss is the fact Obama’s team is already suggesting the coal industry will be first casualty. This is very odd because we have the largest deposits of coal. This does not mean we have to abandon the pursuit of making this energy clean. We are Americans, and can scientifically accomplish greatness. However, team Obama is quick to lay the groundwork for a huge decline in these jobs. Even worse, team Obama blocks laws that can help this industry become more efficient.
Bloomberg: Obama’s Plan Would Close Half of All New Power Plants.
Jason Grumet, Obama’s Chief Energy Advisor On Obama’s Energy Plan:
“Sen. Obama is somewhat unique in not implying that this radical transformation of our economy is just going to be easy, or that stocks are only going to go up. There are going to be significant changes within the manufacturing sector. Those will be painful for some people…. The campaign believes that in the early years of that transition, there will be some disproportionate impact on different industries and different regions that has to be acknowledged up front; they’re not going to be avoidable…”¹
Jason Grumet, Explaining Obama’s Plan Told C-SPAN:
“Obama is confident his carbon policy will make it “ludicrous” to invest money in new coal that’s not 100% sequestered. You only need a $15/ton price on carbon to make pulverized coal uneconomic. If Obama’s unable to get that climate policy in place, he will do whatever is necessary to prevent construction of a round of new pulverized coal plants, including standards that would essentially amount to a moratorium.”
Obama Called For A Tax On “Dirty Energy” Like Coal and Natural Gas:
“What we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (”Q&A With Sen. Barack Obama,” San Antonio Express-News, 2/19/08).
U.S. News: “Isn’t it True Obama You Want Higher Energy Prices?“
So with his obvious aversion to damaging the environment, you think he support laws to make emissions cleaner? Well his record suggests otherwise.
Obama voted against laws that would have helped coal plants capture 100% of the carbon dioxide.
In 2007, Obama Voted Against Mandating The Production Of Six Billion Gallons Of Clean Coal-Derived Fuels. “Bunning, R-Ky., amendment no. 1628 to the Reid, D-Nev., substitute amendment no. 1502. The Bunning amendment would mandate that 6 billion gallons of clean coal-derived fuels’ be produced by 2022. It would define these fuels as having 20 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than gasoline and being produced by facilities that capture 100 percent of carbon dioxide emissions.” (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #213: Rejected 39-55: R 39-6; D 0-47; I 0-2, 6/19/07, Obama Voted Nay)
Obama Blocked Statutory Laws to Make Coal Cleaner:
In 2007, Obama Voted Against Authorizing Funds For Coal-To-Liquid Fuels. “Inhofe, R-Okla., amendment no. 1505 to the Reid substitute amendment no. 1502. The Inhofe amendment would expedite the permitting process for the expansion of refinery facilities and authorize funds for the development of coal-to-liquid and cellulosic biomass fuels.” (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #210: Rejected 43-52: R 43-2; D 0-48; I 0-2, 6/13/07, Obama Voted Nay).
Obama: “The Bunning amendment would have been premature in requiring the production of billions of gallons of coal-to-liquids without providing strong environmental safeguards to ensure that this new fuel alleviates, not worsens, our climate crisis.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Obama Statement On Coal-To-Liquid Fuel Proposals,” Press Release, 6/19/07)
It seems funny that Obama has reservations about science. But his obvious resistance puts the coal industry and other industries that utilize fossil fuels in a ‘catch-22‘.
So it is understood that the coal industry has little wiggle room to emerge victorious. But as a nation we will still need energy to power our nation. The Obama team proposes a comprehensive energy plan that is not only expensive, but does not utilize any of America’s natural resources. And you have to admit the fact Obama put the coal industry in a ‘catch-22′ is at best illogical, at worst criminal.
While it is possible Obama truly believes in the newest forms of energy, what if the motive is good old fashioned greed.
If greed is the motive, is not out of the question that Obama is pushing specific energy paths that benefit shared interests at the cost of entire industries such as coal. Obama is on the record saying he wants to move people away from coal by utilizing “price signals” (sharp increases in energy prices that change behavior).
In turn, this manipulative form would be burdensome to the population. Eventually, we would demand cheaper energy. While the architect of the price fluctuations and manipulations would be the Obama administration, he would claim his plan is not for his shared interests’ gain, but helping America deal with energy challenges.
But who does Obama know that has a vested interest in these forms of energy?
World, Meet George Soro’s and Goldman Sachs.
(Research Soros and compare it to Obama. You’ll find striking similarities. It is elections eve, and I do not have a lot of time to get this out. But please post your findings in the comments section. I will update this post with other information).
George Soros is a huge proponent of this type of energy and has investment, though it is not clear to me how in depth they are. (Please research and help out). He also financed Obama’s campaign. He is also a financial manipulator, convicted of illegal insider trading in France for playing financial games with a bank there. A hedge fund operator, George Soros, who was convicted of insider trading in France, is known to make money from the collapse of national economies and currencies. Labeled “The Man who broke the Bank of England” because of his financial activities against the British currency, he is said to be on a witness list of hedge fund operators that will be called to testify before Congress next month―probably after the election.
The statement above, is “known to make money from collapsed economies and currencies..broke the Bank of England, Insider trading, hedge funds,”
Does that not give you pause? In Nazi Germany, he posed as a German and helped round up his own people, took their possessions, in short..enriched himself as his own people were slaughtered. That alone gives me pause…change that to horror.
George Soros raised $60,000 of this Obama funding, with his own donations and those he procured from his family. Soros reportedly met with Obama first in March — a mere state senator, Obama was the only candidate in the country with whom Soros met personally during the 2004 election cycle, according to Soros spokesman Michael Vachon (quoted by CNS News, July 27, 2004). On June 7, 2004, Obama was in Soros’ New York home for an Obama campaign fundraising event.
But this is where it gets interesting.
It’s reported that Obama and Soros staged a disagreement, as if to show the world they were not on friendly terms. But the donations kept on flowing. Odd? Not unless this theory is true.
Other questions concerning campaign financing: Many of Obama’s donations are untracable. He simply will not publish his donors under $200.00. It would not be unreasonable to assume many of his donations are illegal. But could these millions of smaller donations, which he is not required to record, be coming from the same source?
We will not know unless he releases the data. That ain’t likely now to happen. Check this out:
But this network of secret combinations is not limited to Soros and Obama.
Obama’s biggest donor is still Goldman Sachs and the trio (Goldman, Obama and Soros) run deep with their shared interest in this newer form of energy.
Henry Paulson, the man who convinced Bush of the economic crisis, has huge ties with China and Goldman Sachs.
And almost as secretive were Treasury Secretary Paulson’s maneuvers. He produced a quick three-page proposal to make himself a virtual financial dictator without judicial oversight or review. Then just as quickly it was secretly altered so that he would have the authority to bail out banks in China and other foreign countries.
For those interested in some of the fascinating details about Paulson’s extremely close relationship with China, which may have provoked the financial crisis and stands to benefit from it, the October issue of Bloomberg Markets is a good place to start. It notes that Paulson was sworn in as secretary in July 2006 and that by September he was announcing “creation of the first U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue.” Paulson, the magazine reports, has a relationship with Chinese leaders and has traveled to China at least 70 times in his career. It reports that he personally had $25 million worth of holdings in a Goldman Sachs fund whose sole asset was a stake in the Industrial & Commercial Bank of China.
Goldman Sachs, a “full-service global investment banking and securities firm,” is “the leading underwriter of Chinese equity securities and M&A [merger and acquisition] advisor in China,” its website declares.
“Managing the U.S. relationship with China is an increasingly important part of the Treasury secretary’s job,” Bloomberg Markets says. “During the Fannie and Freddie crisis, Paulson used his credibility with Chinese leaders to reassure them that the U.S. mortgage companies weren’t in jeopardy.” Paulson is quoted as saying that “I clearly talked with the Chinese through this. They’ve worked with me enough that they knew I wouldn’t say it unless I believed it.”
Equally significant, on September 23, Paulson’s former firm, Goldman-Sachs, received an infusion of $5 billion from Warren Buffett, a major Obama financial backer and booster.²
There was also a secret meeting with Tom Brokaw, Goldman Sachs and Obama at the museum of modern art.(This meeting happened shorty before Obama’s primetime debate). It has to be left to speculation on what happened at this meeting.)
In addition, it is rumored that Soros funds various media organizations. This Soros backed venture has influence with major television networks, newspapers and magazines. These well backed groups could be the reason the media is so biased towards Obama & Biden.
But the spending and secret combinations even extend beyond the domestic energy programs. Obama is sponsor of a $840 BILLION dollar poverty bill, that subjects the United States to a United Nations tax of 0.7% of GDP. More investigation into this is needed as well.
I urge all of those interested to begin research. Please post your research links in the comments section here. Lets research and get to the bottom of this fishy story.
It is not to say Obama is a huge fraud. But all these events are terribly fishy. It is really really odd. We must get to the bottom of this. Help out.
Forward this to your friends so we get more people working on this, and more people asking questions. The more this gets out the better we can get to the bottom of this.
Sources are in links above.