New Campaign Ad - Senate Candidate Shoots Rifle Into "Cap & Trade" Target - He's The Democrat

[hatrack]

In a newly unveiled campaign ad, the Democratic Senate candidate and current West Virginia governor, Joe Manchin, picks up a rifle and fires a bullet into a target labeled “Cap and Trade Bill.”

Given that cap-and-trade legislation died months ago in the Senate, some proponents of cap-and-trade see this as a low blow. The bill was abandoned without a vote after many Democrats indicated they would join a united Republican caucus in filibustering the legislation. Meanwhile, anticipated Democratic losses in the midterm elections make cap-and-trade’s passage in the next Congress extremely unlikely.

Mr. Manchin’s Republican opponent, however, has been running ads implying that the governor is anti-coal, supports cap-and-trade and would “rubber-stamp” President Obama’s agenda. In fact, Mr. Manchin has been a consistently outspoken opponent to his party’s carbon-capping ambitions and is a longstanding supporter of the mining companies and unions of his state.

But to make himself perfectly clear, he set his sights on the deceased bill. “I’ll take dead aim at the cap-and-trade bill,” Mr. Manchin says, pausing to fire off a round. “Because it’s bad for West Virginia.”

EDIT

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/taking-aim-literally-at-a-dead-climate-bill/

[NickB79]

1. Will his next ad have him eating coal for breakfast?

Because "it's good for West Virginia"?

[phantom power]

2. Wow, that's... just damned masculine!

Guns! Punching hippies! Coal worship!
:woohoo:

[phantom power]

3. I pity da fool who try to be more pro-coal than me!

[tularetom]

4. With friends like him...

Who needs friends like him.

I guess he's preferable to the republican running against him, and I would never support a republican but I gotta say I won't be sad if this asshole loses.

[Staph]

7. The Republican, John Raese...

According to Project Vote Smart (political positions not listed are unknown):

John Raese's inferred positions (http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=59549):

• Pro-life
  
• For the elimination of the estate tax
  
• Against the stimulus
  
• Against environmental regulations to reduce climate change
  
• Against restrictions on gun ownership
  
• Against publicly-administered health insurance
  
• Against gay marriage
  

As opposed to the positions of Joe Manchin (http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=7547):

• Pro-life (He's Catholic -- pro-life is his personal stance but he's never pushed for any legislation against abortion)
  
• For the stimulus
  
• Against privatizing Social Security
  
• For federal education standards and testing
  
• Against environmental regulations to reduce climate change
  
• Against restrictions on gun ownership
  

So, tell me again, given this choice, who would you vote for?

[tularetom]

9. Years ago, I voted for the candidate not the party

The Clinton scandals of the 90's more or less cured me of that habit, so now I vote the straight Democratic ticket.

I never said I wouldn't vote for him. Given the opportunity I would. All I said was it wouldn't break my heart if he lost.

He appears to be little more than a whore for the coal bidness and I really don't appreciate the low blows against the president.

A male Blanche Lincoln in my opinion.

[notesdev]

5. If more Democrats would do that...

... we might have a fighting chance this election.

If you stay actively informed you should know by now that Cap & Trade primarily benefits Goldman Sachs, BP, and other big players in the financial and energy markets, at the cost of a large hit to the standard of living of the lower and middle classes.

[hatrack]

8. Oh, yes, as you point out, hardly anyone on this forum is "actively informed"

nt

[notesdev]

11. Many here have a very bad habit

which is "seeing only what one wants to see"

They hear "cap and trade is good for the environment" and they look no further.

But if you do look further you find that a) Cap & Trade does nothing for the environment; b) its top promoters are energy conglomerates which plan to cash in on "sequestering carbon" accounting tricks; and c) Goldman Sachs is already positioned to control the exchange of carbon allowances.

Bad mojo, that.

[hatrack]

12. Did you read the article? The bill is already dead.

nt

[notesdev]

14. Then there's no harm in opposing it, is there?

[hatrack]

15. He may as well be shooting a target saying "Smoot-Hawley" or "Alien & Sedition Act"

Hell, if his stance on this issue is any indication of his broader environmental views, he may as well have taped a great auk or a passenger pigeon across the target.

By the way, I agree that cap & trade would have been a total joke, and the entire idea of emissions permits being gamed by Wall Street and The City is nothing short of appalling.

Of course, the only other approach on this whole issue that makes sense is a carbon tax, and you can sure as hell bet that if cap and trade was a bridge or five too far, he's not going to support anything with the word "TAX" in it. Which leaves . . . .what? Oh, no, I know - he's going to talk about Clean Coal Technology!!!!!! (R) Yeah - that'll fix the problem.

[kristopher]

16. That is the Republican Party line - thanks for sharing.

It is also false. Even a weak cap and trade policy would be a huge boost to address climate change in that it gives a dramatic economic signal to the energy markets from the worlds biggest carbon glutton.

You are completely wrong.

[notesdev]

18. You have gobbled up propaganda whole

Cap & Trade will be absolutely zero boost to address climate change, since all you're doing is making industry move from the US to China, where Cap & Trade does not apply. Unless under your theory of climate change, carbon production in China doesn't matter. Is this just "No Carbon in My Backyard" nonsense or do you care about consistency?

Speaking about consistency... the US is no longer the world's biggest producer of carbon emissions. Guess who is?

Cap & Trade will gut what remains of the economy and hand the rest of our manufacturing base to non-regulated overseas economies. This does no good whatsoever for the environment, but it will mean much harder times for Americans than the ones we're already in for.

Cap & Trade is about benefiting big energy producers and big financials. If you think anything else about the subject you are naive and deluded.

[kristopher]

19. Again, thank you for sharing Republican propaganda.

The policy is being fought tooth and nail by the coal industry for a reason. If it didn't matter they damned sure wouldn't be spending literally hundreds of millions of dollars fighting it.

It would have none of the economic consequences the representatives of the coal industry are predicting. In fact, it would be the trigger for a huge jobs program associated with the move to a non-carbon energy infrastructure.

[Steve20]

6. re

Nothing wrong with a conservative Democrat.

[NickB79]

10. Except for the fact that he's pimping planet-killing coal, nope nothing wrong at all

:eyes:

[hatrack]

13. Yeah, did you see him shoot that target labeled "Tree-Huggers"?

Hyuck, didn't that just kick ASS?!?!?!?

[TheWraith]

17. Okay, I really really want him to win...

...and anyone who thinks that a Republican would be better is deluding themselves. But still, I can't help but get the feeling that Joe Manchin is a bit of a fuckstick.