This can be explained only by assuming that The Rominee, like all teabaggRs, of whom he's a handmade replicant, has no policy coherence other than saying Fuck You to anything and everything supported by our president. I don't think harmfulness to our future enters into it at all: it's politics at its most cynical and careless. To me it's absolutely incomprehensible that any forward-thinking (or any any-thinking) person can support him and his. For the latest example of their malfeasance, I refer to his confirming that he'd
end subsidies for wind energy, while, of course, maintaining billions in tax breaks and subsidies for the billions-profiting oil companies.
Mitt Romney looks set to declare war on America's wind energy industry, further emphasising the dividing line between the presumptive Republican presidential candidate and President Barack Obama on energy issues.
Romney's campaign confirmed this week he wants to end long-standing tax credits for wind farm projects when the incentives come up for review later this year.
The pledge means the popular production tax credits (PTCs) – which have helped drive a surge in new wind energy investment in the US, making it the second largest wind energy market in the world after China – would be allowed to expire at the end of this year if the Republicans secure the White House in November.
[...]
However, green groups, renewable energy industry insiders, and Democrats were all quick to point out that Romney's desire for a level playing field on energy policy does not extend to oil and gas, where he has pledged to retain up to $40bn of subsidies and tax breaks that President Obama wants to see phased out.
Romney also faces accusations he has flip-flopped on clean energy policy, given that as governor of Massachusetts between 2003 and 2007 he talked up the potential for renewable energy and approved state support packages for a number of clean tech firms.
The latest pledge to roll back support for the wind energy sector is likely to appeal to the GOP's base...
(I don't miss a lot, but I'd missed that, and I thank Mike for linking me to it.)
There's despicableness in this, but it's entirely consistent with the legislative behavior of today's Rs, where derision and destruction is the default attitude. Their response to a suggestion --
a suggestion!! -- by the USDA that, in order to
save water in
devastatingly drought-stricken parts of the country, people go meatless on Mondays: pledging to
gorge themselves on meat. Seriously. Not even disastrous drought could cause them to think for a minute about the common good. Give it a moment's consideration on its merits, rather than acting like children. Bullies, like their leader. (Note: I have no way of knowing if it's true, but
the claims about the water needed to
produce a pound of meat are astounding. So, agree or disagree, it's a strategy worthy of honest examination. But not to these people, to whom worthiness isn't worth even a passing mention.)
In our local paper there was a letter reflecting something said by one of my occasional commenters: mistrust of Obama based on what he said to Mr Medved about post-election missile treaties: both writers see unAmerican deal-making. What they forget -- because their Foxorovian news sources don't mention it, and have taught them not to think for themselves -- is that treaties have to be ratified by Congress. It's perfect: an innocent and obvious comment by President Obama has become a rationalization for voting for the most destructive group of people ever to occupy the halls of Congress. Who could have thought -- certainly not Thomas Jefferson! -- that our democracy could be so easily manipulated into serving a handful of oligarchs by getting so many willfully gullible people to vote against their obvious best interests.
Like an idiot, I keep thinking that seeing enough of the above examples will awaken to reality those lost minds. But in my heart of hearts, my rational mind, I know it's not gonna happen. And yet, the awfulness is as obvious as
scorched cornfields.
God, it's depressing.
