and, unless i'm mistaken, we're a ways off from nooculahr cars. imagine the panic in the mid-town tunnel when a truck backfires!
Ethanol is part of the biomass research which Bush is CUTTING despite what he said in his SOTU. You didn't pay attention the article posted in this thread very well.
yeah.. so you libs should all be quiet and listen to Bush's gospel.. I mean speech.. didn't you all pay attention about Iraq and they're WMD a couple of years ago? if Bush says OBL is our ally then so be it..
I don't want the government spending money developing ethanol powered cars unless the government is also going to be giving the people said cars. If it is going to be the automakers who profit off of ethanol cars, let the automakers develop them. It sure seems like if a car company offered a car that would be much cheaper to operate than what is now available, they could make a lot of money off of it.
I am curious to see if bigtexxx will come back in this thread. We have a case where he apparently believed and supported what the president said. The president then set about cutting from programs that he had said he was going to develop. bigtexxx's trust was betrayed. I would be curious to see how he feels about that now.
Please post the article where it says it will be cut. I'm sure it's a case of you reading what you want to read, and seeing only what you want to see, yet again.
To save you from reading the bottom half of page 6 in this thread, I went ahead and pulled the appropriate paragraphs from the NYTimes article... Please feel free to go back and check the context though... I realize that sometimes facts can be biased, so please let us know how you read the article.
This is proof positive that you and FranchiseBlade are not able to read the entire story. You look for any negative news you can find, then your mind shuts down. You've created a mental block and have the ammo that you think you need to continue to bash Bush. If you would get several perspectives, you would see that Bush is INCREASING the budget for ethanol by $60M over the 2006 budget. http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060203/BUSINESS04/602030361/1001 Your silly link assumes that the NREL is the only place where ethanol research takes place. You have to look at the entire picture.
Talk about not reading the entire story. Here are the paragraphs from the story you cite... So, here you are saying a Bush proposal that hasn't even made it through Congress trumps the documented actions of the administration. How's that Mars mission going?
Bush has proposed increased spending on ethanol, as I posted in the article. What part of that do you not comprehend? Of course it has to get passed by Congress. That's how spending bills work.
What I'm saying is this administration has a proven history of spouting off nice sounding rhetoric without following up on the implementation. The fact that Bush is talking about ethanol research and how it will lessen our dependence on imported oil and improve our lives while even before he spoke his administration is cutting ethanol research in the premier Govt Lab for this kind of research is telling. There is a definite history of this kind of thing during Bush's tenure. Excuse me if I'm cynical. I do favor alternative fuels, but I can't escape the idea that Bush, or at least those who matter in the administration, are not serious about alternative fuels... as the quick retraction about cutting oil dependency by 75% proves. My guess is that it is cover for pumping up nuclear (and yes I understand that alt fuels and nuclear have different purposes, but nobody said politics is sensical). I would love it if Bush is serious, but at this point I think it is the burden of the administration and its supporters to prove that they are... the time for assuming they will do what they say is long past.
What I am saying is that Bush proposed spending on ehtanol and then went back and immediately cut research on ethanol. You bought his line, and he has betrayed your trust.
Nope. He proposed increases in spending for ethanol. You fail to understand how you can cut some parts of something, yet still grow it overall by adding to others. It went right over your head when your mind shut off after you saw one sliver of information and extrapolated the rest erroneously. You need to work on that.
Repitition is not argumentation my friend. You've repeated that line multiple times and have thrown insults at everyone but that doesn't change the facts. Saying something at the SOTU does not always equate with what happens outside of the speech. Bush promised to send humans to Mars and then goes and cuts NASA's budget a year later. Bush promised more student loans a few years ago and well that's gone down also. Merely stating a desire to encourage ethanol does not take precedence over the fact that funding hasn't increased to date, in fact it's gone down. Biomass research cuts have been pushed through ever since 2001. The ethanol speech just caused people to take note of that. I hesitate to say that Bush is a liar because obviously he needs time to formulate his new energy bill to push through his proposals but so far he hasn't really done much for ethanol. He had his chance when pressure was on Congress to pass an energy bill, and that bill actually cut ALL FUNDING for sugar-based ethanol because of protectionist fears from corn-producers that Brazilian sugar would dominate our ethanol market. Hopefully Bush does something different this time, but I'm not counting on it.
You have been shown the steps has done to cut ethanol research. Please show me the steps Bush has done to help develop it, other than just talk. I'm sorry but actions speak louder than words.
LOL once again you can't see the forest for the trees. You've got to propose something before it gets done. I can't believe I'm still replying to your baiting.
