This is blatant manipulation of Obama's words. Let me ask you a question. Can a bill be the largest investment investment in clean energy to date that is, and yet still not rise to the point of what the candidate considers serious enough???
What if we spent only two thousand dollars in the past on clean energy and Obama said he voted for a bill that was for two million because it was the largest to date. Could Obama also say that it isn't two million still wasn't a serious effort, of course he could.
SPONSORED BY:
Stacking the Deck
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
SPONSORED BY
Obama later contradicted himself, saying the Bush administration had done nothing serious about alternative fuels or raising fuel efficiency:
Obama: One thing I note is folks have got a lot of sun here, and yet we have not seen any serious effort on the part of this administration to spur on the use of alternative fuels, raise fuel efficiency standards on cars.
obamaIf the 2005 energy bill signed by President Bush was indeed the "single largest investment in clean energy" ever seen, as Obama says, then it's hard to see how his administration can be faulted for lack of "any serious effort" to promote alternative fuels. Furthermore, another bill Bush signed in December sets a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, the first major increase in vehicle fuel efficiency standards in more than three decades. The National Environmental Trust called it "an extraordinary change from just a little while ago."
It is certainly true that more could be done, and Obama would be within his rights to say that Bush's efforts aren't serious enough to suit him. But claiming a lack of any serious effort at all is contradicted by the record and by Obama's own words.
Edwards' Weak Alibi
Edwards said he had changed his position on a proposed nuclear waste site at Nevada's Yucca Mountain because of allegations of forged documents. In response to a charge from Clinton that he voted twice in favor of making Yucca a nuclear waste site, Edwards said:
Edwards: I said the science that has been revealed since that time and the forged documents that have been revealed since that time have made it very – this has been for years, Hillary. This didn't start last year or three years ago. I've said this for years now – have revealed that this thing does not make sense, is not good for the people of Nevada, and it's not good for America.
edwardsActually, Edwards had changed his position when he signed on as the 2004 running mate of presidential candidate John Kerry, who was opposed to the nuclear repository. That was long before the documents scandal erupted in March 2005.
For example, a New York Times report in August 2004 quoted Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, a Yucca foe, as saying Edwards had called him to say he was "on the Yucca mountain bandwagon" after Kerry tapped him as his running mate. Mark Kornblau, Edwards' spokesman also said: ''John Kerry has very clearly stated that his administration will oppose the storage of dangerous nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain and John Edwards is very comfortable with that policy.''
Discuss