Biblicoal
You know what's stupider than burning rocks? Trying to squeeze liquid out of rocks and then burning them. That's what Barack Obama, my candidate and yours1 would spend a jazillion tax dollars investing in, rather than actual viable methods of renewable energy. It's a little too Biblical for my tastes:
17:1. Then all the multitude of the children of America setting forward from the desert of Sin, by their McMansions, according to the word of the Lord, encamped in the freeways, where there was no gas for the people to drive with.
17:2. And they chode with Obama, and said: Give us gas, that we may drive! And Obama answered them: Why chide you with me? Wherefore do you tempt the Lord?
17:3. So the people were thirsty there for want of gas, and murmured against Obama, saying: Why didst thou run for president, to inconvenience us and our children, and our way of life with fucking wind energy? Don't you know that kills a few birds?
17:4. And Obama cried to the Lord, saying: What shall I do to this people? Yet a little more and they will stone me.
17:5. And the Lord said to Obama: Go before the people, and take with thee of the ancients of Illinois coal lobbies: and take in thy hand the polls wherewith thou didst strike the river, and go.
17:6. Behold I will stand there before thee, upon the coal Horeb, and thou shalt strike the coal, and liquefied gas shall come out of it that the people may drive. Obama did so before the ancients of Illinois coal lobbies.
And the ancients were much pleased. The Lord, too.
But alas, not anymore, for Barack has renounced his ways, according to Grist: "Illinois senator and presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D) has qualified his support for coal -- which is, you may recall, the enemy of the human race." The L.A. Times adds, "With his statement Tuesday, Obama seemed to be making his choice clear: pledging to oppose any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards."
It's good to know that environmental policy isn't going to force us to rely on the same foundation faith-based science the Creation Museum is founded on.
And the greens were much pleased.
17:1. Then all the multitude of the children of America setting forward from the desert of Sin, by their McMansions, according to the word of the Lord, encamped in the freeways, where there was no gas for the people to drive with.
17:2. And they chode with Obama, and said: Give us gas, that we may drive! And Obama answered them: Why chide you with me? Wherefore do you tempt the Lord?
17:3. So the people were thirsty there for want of gas, and murmured against Obama, saying: Why didst thou run for president, to inconvenience us and our children, and our way of life with fucking wind energy? Don't you know that kills a few birds?
17:4. And Obama cried to the Lord, saying: What shall I do to this people? Yet a little more and they will stone me.
17:5. And the Lord said to Obama: Go before the people, and take with thee of the ancients of Illinois coal lobbies: and take in thy hand the polls wherewith thou didst strike the river, and go.
17:6. Behold I will stand there before thee, upon the coal Horeb, and thou shalt strike the coal, and liquefied gas shall come out of it that the people may drive. Obama did so before the ancients of Illinois coal lobbies.
And the ancients were much pleased. The Lord, too.
But alas, not anymore, for Barack has renounced his ways, according to Grist: "Illinois senator and presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D) has qualified his support for coal -- which is, you may recall, the enemy of the human race." The L.A. Times adds, "With his statement Tuesday, Obama seemed to be making his choice clear: pledging to oppose any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards."
It's good to know that environmental policy isn't going to force us to rely on the same foundation faith-based science the Creation Museum is founded on.
And the greens were much pleased.
1.Is anyone else out there secretly a little relieved that we don't have to vote for Dennis Kucinich again?
posted by The Goo at 8:26 AM
6 Comments:
Genius post.
I'm putting a permalink to your blog on my blog.
obama voted the wrong way tuesday on liquid coal. so did clinton.
on the other hand, at an event last night john edwards said he wouldn't support any new coal or nuclear power plants.
- dbh
Are you fucking kidding me? RAURGH!Or wait, did I miss something in the news yesterday that said liquid coal is no longer the stupidest effing thing in the entire expanding universe?
Do you have a link? I didn't see it in the Post yet.
Oh, and thanks for the kudos, Cap'n Jack. I will reciprocate with due haste. After I edit this one thingy for work, though.
there were two votes yesterday - a bunning amendment on coal to liquids. this was a really bad one. obama and clinton voted against this one and it was defeated.
then there was a tester amendment that would have given $200 million to build coal to liquid plants, and provide $10 billion in loan guarantees to capture and store the carbon. obama and clinton voted for this one (also defeated).
obama justifies his vote using the quote you have on your page - "unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards." this is nonsense, but maybe he's convinced himself it isn't.
- dbh
Why I won't be voting for Obama: cause I don't vote in the primaries. Bamn!
Post a Comment
<< Home