Ted Kennnedy, demanding financial sacrifice from America's wealthy during the recent Presidential election:
The President says the war on terrorism requires us to tighten our belts. But he refuses to ask the wealthiest taxpayers to share the burden; in fact, he proposes the opposite. In the midst of repeated calls to sacrifice, he is advocating massive new tax breaks primarily for those with the highest incomes. But under the Bush tax plan already enacted, the wealthiest 1% of taxpayers will each save an average of $50,000 a year. Now he proposes to give each of them even more - an additional $25,000 a year. He sees no need for them to share in the national sacrifice. That policy is wrong. We cannot say it is wartime for the rest of America, but still peacetime for the rich.
That's all well and good, but what about the sacrifices Teddy is willing to make? Currently there is a plan to build windmills off the coast of the Cape Cod that would provide 75% of the needed power for the Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard communities as well as much of the surrounding areas. Clean, eternally renewable energy no less.
Now these windmills would be located far enough out to see that they'd be visible only as small blips on the horizon, but they would be visible (on clear days) from Teddy's Cape Cod compound. Is Teddy willing to sacrifice a small portion of the view from his deluxe abode for the greater good?
Which is really sort of amazing, isn't it? There is almost no downside to these windmills, environmentally or economically, yet it may well be that they won't get build thanks to the influence of Ted Kennedy and other rich liberals who don't want to have to look at the windmills while swilling cocktails.
It kind of reminds me of how John Kerry demanded that Americans drive more efficient vehicles he himself trucked around in one of the biggest SUV gas-hots on the market.
By Rob Port of Say Anything.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Politics
Tags: politics
Comments (11)
NIMBY? Meet BANANA (Build A... (Below threshold)1. Posted by D | August 19, 2005 2:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
NIMBY? Meet BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anybody).
1. Posted by D | August 19, 2005 2:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:27
2. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | August 19, 2005 2:28 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Of course he doesn't want to look at the windmills while swilling his Chivas: the spinning of the windmills compounded by the spinning of the room would be more than even man of Teddy's intestinal fortitude could stand.
2. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | August 19, 2005 2:28 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:28
3. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 2:30 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Weak.
Goldberg asserts that Ted is against the windfarm with no source. There's also no source to suggest the resaon for the speculated opposition. He asserts that Ted "recruited" with no evidence to support it.
What is RFK Jr.'s stated reason for opposing the farm?
3. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 2:30 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:30
4. Posted by blueeyes | August 19, 2005 2:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There are some reasons to be anti-wind farm. After all, enough windmills could significantly effect climate patterns. They also cost twice what nuclear power does, watt per watt.
But when you're anti-nuclear power, can't use solar cells, and aren't willing to start new oil drilling, well, then giving up on windmill generators is just not a good idea.
4. Posted by blueeyes | August 19, 2005 2:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:35
5. Posted by moseby | August 19, 2005 2:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I heard that TFK (I have NO idea [and don't care] if his midddle initial is "F"--it just fits) is going around saying he invented the windmill. That's what perplexes me...he's against his own invention...???!!!
"I did it first. I invented the windmill...tell em Fred...Hoo Hoo"
5. Posted by moseby | August 19, 2005 2:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:35
6. Posted by Old Coot | August 19, 2005 2:41 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Teddy is a one-man windfarm....connect a generator to both ends and enjoy almost unlimited power from a just a quart or two of cheap booze each day. OBTW, OSHA will probably require some warning signs advising folks not to get downwind of him when he's generating.
6. Posted by Old Coot | August 19, 2005 2:41 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 14:41
7. Posted by Kman | August 19, 2005 3:13 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Isn't that the standard liberal creed?
"Do as I say to do, not as I do."
Rules, laws, taxes, etc? Those are for everybody else.
7. Posted by Kman | August 19, 2005 3:13 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 15:13
8. Posted by bullwinkle | August 19, 2005 4:32 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Why complain about a tax cut for the only ones paying taxes? Poor people won't be sacrificing a damn thing, they'd get a tax cut too but you can't cut what they don't pay. You could double their taxes they'd never notice. Two times nothing is still nothing. I'm sure the rich would love to share burden, point me at the person that wants to shoulder some of my load.
8. Posted by bullwinkle | August 19, 2005 4:32 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 16:32
9. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 4:52 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
TFK?
I think it's EMK, but I don't know what the M is for . . .
9. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 4:52 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 16:52
10. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 4:53 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Moore
10. Posted by Just John | August 19, 2005 4:53 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 16:53
11. Posted by McGehee | August 19, 2005 7:15 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Of Kennedy? No, not Moore -- LESS!
11. Posted by McGehee | August 19, 2005 7:15 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 19, 2005 19:15