Obama hits back at Mccain’s negative attacks on the issue of alternative energy and oil

I'm eager to hear your comments...
Related Products:

  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts:

  1. UP Alternative Energy

9 Responses to “Obama hits back at Mccain on Alternative Energy, Oil”

  • FluxCapacitor2008 says:

    The purpose is apparent, CHEVRON and its subsidiaries Cobasys and others refuse to make the batteries available so as to keep the United States and other countries dependent on oil. That is precisely what the Sherman Act and other legislation is all about: conspiring to restrain the trade.
    The results are devastating beyond the mere economic impact, consisting of trade imbalances and budget deficits, rather national security is affected.

  • FluxCapacitor2008 says:

    one issue is whether CHEVRON engages in restraint of trade by having acquired the holder of patent rights covering deep cycle large frame NiMH batteries, yet neither manufactures such a product nor licenses the manufacturing rights to those willing to pay a license fee.

  • FluxCapacitor2008 says:

    The purpose is apparent, CHEVRON and its subsidiaries Cobasys and others refuse to make the batteries available so as to keep the United States and other countries dependent on oil. That is precisely what the Sherman Act and other legislation is all about: conspiring to restrain the trade.
    The results are devastating beyond the mere economic impact, consisting of trade imbalances and budget deficits, rather national security is affected.

  • FluxCapacitor2008 says:

    one issue is whether CHEVRON engages in restraint of trade by having acquired the holder of patent rights covering deep cycle large frame NiMH batteries, yet neither manufactures such a product nor licenses the manufacturing rights to those willing to pay a license fee

  • Carlibra57 says:

    “leaves no carbon footprint” … true, but it leaves nuclear waste for 250,000 years! That’s not a true solution, so solar, wind and geo-thermal which harnesses the free energy that’s already being given to us is the logical solution and it’s without the legacy issues for future generations to deal with. Oil, coal and nuclear are just short-sighted solutions with many long term and problematic consequences.

  • jtartsy says:

    lol…Actually It was Obama who FINALLY mentioned how these oil companies who want the rights to drill off shore in the US apparently ALREADY have the rights to over 60 MILLION ACRES of land in the U.S. witch to my surprise has not produced a SINGLE DROP of oil for the US or anyone. Why??? Because they are not drilling anything. So explain why sign over the rights for more land “TO DRILL DRILL DRILL” when they are currently doing nothing with the land that they currently have rights to.

  • briancfcht says:

    IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE DEMOCRATS WHO HAVE VOTED AGAINST DRILLING OFFSHORE IN THE US AND IN ALASKA! Remind me again WHY I should vote for Obama!?!?

  • Boobalopbop says:

    Aaaaiiiiight!!

  • jtartsy says:

    Dam Barack came back pretty good on that one.

Leave a Reply