Stossel says Sen. Clinton voted against ethanol 17 times. True or false?

[Breeze54]

:shrug:

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. I don't know, I do know that stossel is an asshat.

:evilgrin:

[Breeze54]

3. So do I know that Stossel is an asshat!! lmao!

but I am to lazy right now, to look up all her votes!
Just was asking to see if someone knew off the top of their head. ;)

[Captain Angry]

2. Does Stossel cite his source?

Or why that means anything at all?

[Breeze54]

5. He doesn't on his tv spots, if that's

what you're asking.

[Captain Angry]

7. I was just trying to find out if it even has merit.

I can run around and say that Bush eats small children, but without sources or proof, it's crap.

Stossel doesn't get a free pass just because he's on TV.

[Breeze54]

8. No shit, sherlock. That's

why I asked!!!!!!

[Captain Angry]

9. Nice.

I'm answering your question in a roundabout way.

Why do you care what some guy on TV says, when he has no credibility our sourcing?

[Breeze54]

11. My question isn't about Stossel.

I just wanted to know if anyone HERE knew if she had,
in fact, voted against ethanol 17 times.
Stossel isn't the topic.
Sen. Clinton and her ethanol votes is.

[Captain Angry]

12. Fine. Since you are apparently incapable of using Google, here.

Clinton Has Voted At Least 17 Times Against Ethanol. (S.517, CQ Vote #67: Adopted 61-36: R 27-20; D 33-16; I 1-0, 4/11/02, Clinton Voted Nay; S. 517, CQ Vote #78: Motion Agreed To 69-30: R 31-17; D 37-13; I 1-0, 4/23/02, Clinton Voted Nay; S. 517, CQ Vote #87: Motion Agreed To 57-42: R 38-10; D 18-32; I 1-0, 4/25/02, Clinton Voted Nay; S. 517, CQ Voted #88: Motion Agreed To 60-39: R 28-20; D 31-19; I 1-0, 4/25/02, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 4, CQ Vote #94, Passed 88-11: R: 45-3; D: 42-8; I: 1-0, 4/25/02, Clinton Voted Nay; S. 14, CQ Vote #203: Rejected 35-60: R 19-31; D 16-28; I 0-1, 6/3/03, Clinton Voted Yea; S. 14, CQ Vote #204: Rejected 34-62: R 21-30; D 13-31; I 0-1, 6/3/05, Clinton Voted Yea; S.1 4, CQ Vote #206: Rejected 37-58: R 19-30; D 17-28; I 1-0, 6/4/03, Clinton Voted Yea; S.14, CQ Voted #207: Rejected 26-69: R 12-37; D 14-31; I 0-1, 6/5/03, Clinton Voted Yea; S. 14, CQ Vote #208: Rejected 38-57: R 9-40; D 28-17; I 1-0, 6/5/03, Clinton Voted Yea; S. 14, CQ Vote #209: Adopted 67-29: R 31-18; D 35-11; I 1-0, 6/5/03, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #456: Motion Rejected 57-40: R 44-7; D 13-32; I 0-1, 11/21/03, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #137, Motion Agreed To 59-38: R 45-9; D 14-28; I 0-1, 6/14/05, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #138, Motion Agreed To 69-28: R 39-14; D 30-14; I 0-0, 6/15/05, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #139: Adopted 70-26: R 38-14; D 32-12; I 0-0; 6/15/05, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #213: Adopted 74-26: R 49-6; D 25-19; I 0-1, 7/29/05, Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 6, CQ Vote #317, Passed 84-14: R 48-3, D 35-11, I 1-0, 7/31/03, Clinton Voted Nay)

That is the talking point. It's from the GOP's site, and I found it with exactly one search. "Clinton ethanol votes"

You took some guy's word that something may or may not have happened, and couldn't spend the 15 seconds more looking it up.

[Breeze54]

14. I'm quite capable of using google.

:rofl:

Your response is clear as mud. Nobody forced you to reply.

If you didn't know offhand, then you didn't know.

I asked if anyone knew, 'offhand'.

[Breeze54]

20. Well, maybe YOU have DSL but not all of us do!!!!!!!!!!

Aren't you f-ing lucky!!!!! :sarcasm:

Your name fits perfectly!! Good choice. "Captain Angry" :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[whistle]

4. I sure hope so and if it comes up again I hope she votes against

...ethanol again. It is a complete wast of resources and solves nothing regarding fuel shortages, but we'll sure have food shortages

[youngdem]

6. If she did, it marks the first time I have been impressed with her political courage in a while

Because ethanol is a fraud. (At least with present technology)

[Breeze54]

10. political courage?

Ok, if you say so. :shrug:

[DawnIsis]

15. I've heard lots of negative regarding ethanol so I don't see why her voting

against it makes her bad?

We should stick with electric cars, oh wait then how will they charge us by the gallon :sarcasm:

[Breeze54]

17. I didn't say if her votes were bad or good or even existed.

I don't know and I don't know what bills she did or didn't vote on as far as ethanol.

I'll look it up tomorrow when I have more bandwidth. ;)

[DawnIsis]

19. Oh I thought you were saying her vote against ethanol was somehow a negative since you posted

"Political courage?"

Ethanol is Bush's dream of how to keep ripping off Americans at the pump. So it does take courage to vote against it.

[Breeze54]

21. No,

I was being sarcastic referring to her IWR vote, as in 'other' votes. ;)

[John Q. Citizen]

23. Yes, i agree. It will piss off the farm belt who likes the subsidies, but ethanol

is a loser in terms of corn and energy efficiency.

[originalpckelly]

13. Very good. Ethanol is only better than oil in that it gets us off of foreign sources...

but it is and will continue to drive up the price of corn, and thusly, food.

[John Q. Citizen]

24. It's also inefficient in terms of costs, environmental and otherwise. It requires

more fossil fuel to produce than the energy derived from it. It is dependent on subsidies.

[stevedeshazer]

16. False

Because John F'ing Stossel said so, you can take it to the bank.

[Breeze54]

18. lol! I was figuring that but wanted to verify.

pesky bandwidth. ;)

[John Q. Citizen]

25. It's too bad if it's false. If she is voting for ethanol it's another reason to not vote for her.

It means she's scamming all of us, along with the farm belt folks who love the federal subsidies for a highly inefficient and environmentally harmful technology.

[Bitwit1234]

22. google...that should have it...I'll check it out and get back.

[mahina]

26. If so, good, finally something I can support from her.

Ethanol is a giant scam and we'll need that water pronto.

[BenDavid]

27. Read and decide:

Senator Hillary Clinton's vote was notable because it changed from Yes on the first vote, to No on the final vote.

In the Congressional Record, she points out various failings of the bill, and repeatedly mentions that the bill will do nothing to reduce dependency on foreign oil.

She said "I oppose the bill for two reasons. First, it contains a number of highly objectionable provisions. Second, it simply ignores several of our most pressing energy challenges, such as our dependence on foreign oil."

The Senator cited problems in the bill including:

"billions in subsidies for mature energy industries, including oil and nuclear power"
"exempt hydraulic fracturing from coverage under the Safe Drinking Water Act"
"exempt oil and gas construction sites from stormwater runoff regulations under the Clean Water Act"
"accelerates the siting procedures for liquid natural gas terminals and weakens the State role in the process"
removes moratorium on oil drilling off most of the U.S. coast by authorizing an inventory of oil and gas resources there
Senator Clinton objected to the following items being removed in conference committee or omitted from the bill:

"a provision that would reduce U.S. oil consumption by 1 million barrels of oil per day by 2015"
"a modest provision to increase the percentage of electricity generated from renewable sources to 10 percent by the year 2020"
"a mandatory program to start reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to climate change"
Senator Clinton concluded by saying,

"I see a major missed opportunity. By the President's own admission, this bill won't do anything to reduce gasoline prices, but we know for a fact that it will give billions in tax breaks to companies like Exxon Mobil. It doesn't do nearly enough to push the development and commercialization of clean, next-generation energy technologies, but it gives huge tax breaks to nuclear power, a technology that has been with us for 50 years. And given what we now know about the looming threat of climate change, it makes no sense to make energy policy without integrating a cost-effective strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But that is exactly what this bill does."

Sounds convincing to me.....
BD

[fujiyama]

28. I don't know. I don't care. I do know that Stossel is an idiot.

and being someone incredibly critical of Hillary, I'll be willing to vote for her enthusiastically against anyone of the republican freaks she's running against (five minutes was enough to remind me that Hillary would make a million times better president than those wackos).