Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Chimp's Advisors Now "Clarifying" His Remarks About ME Oil "Addiction"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:00 AM
Original message
Chimp's Advisors Now "Clarifying" His Remarks About ME Oil "Addiction"
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 09:00 AM by hatrack
WASHINGTON — One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting 75% of imports from there by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said yesterday that the president didn't mean it literally. What the president meant, they said, was that alternative fuels could displace an amount of oil imports equal to most of what America is expected to import from the Middle East in 2025.

Bush vowed to fund research into better batteries for hybrid vehicles and more production of the alternative fuel ethanol, setting a lofty goal of replacing "more than 75% of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025." He pledged to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."

Not exactly, it turns out.

"This was purely an example," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said. He said the broad goal was to displace foreign oil imports, from anywhere, with domestic alternatives. He acknowledged that oil is a freely traded commodity bought and sold globally by private firms. Consequently, it would be very difficult to reduce imports from any single region, especially the most oil-rich region on Earth. Asked why the president used the words "the Middle East" when he didn't really mean them, one administration official told Knight Ridder News Service that Bush wanted to dramatize the issue in a way that "every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands."

EDIT

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060202/NEWS02/602020405
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. Put the lie on the front-page headline, put the retraction on p20,in 8pt
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 09:18 AM by BlueEyedSon
type, at the bottom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Then repeat the lie
Repeat. Repeat.

Like all other W speeches, all lies. He says the opposite of what is true.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
3. ...president didn't mean it literally - then jump all over Kerry's 53%...
You would think that for being facists, they could at least be consistent.

reference: Kerry claimed High School drop out rates were 53%, and everyone is doing gymnastics to see where he got the number, made it up, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WearyOne2 Donating Member (59 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. flip flop
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Elidor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
5. "He's the president: he doesn't mean all that shit he says! Sheesh."
"You guys. Taking him literally and all that."

/bodman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
6. Hee hee! "Every American understands.."
Suuuure. We Americans are experts on the pragmatics of oil geopolitics. No possible confusion there...

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
7. The retraction is for the Saudi"s..
Who did react to that part of the SOTU with considerable negativity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. Big oil promised lower prices during the 2004 election. Be carefull
what you wish for. Called loan-sharking: "I'll do you this favour". And then you pay for it later. Seems Bush has no policy tools that can undo the power of OPEC to get what they want.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
9. Somebody alert Katie Couric, who treated Kerry's skepticism w such scorn
and derision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC