Elect me and oil prices instantly drop, says Hillary Clinton in Iowa

[stephanie]

I think the only thing she hasn't promised us...is the kitchen sink..:coffee:

BY MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Sunday, December 23rd 2007, 4:00 AM

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Hillary Clinton predicted Saturday that just electing her President will cut the price of oil.

When the world hears her commitment at her inauguration about ending American dependence on foreign fuel, Clinton says, oil-pumping countries will lower prices to stifle America's incentive to develop alternative energy.

"I predict to you, the oil-producing countries will drop the price of oil," Clinton said, speaking at the Manchester YWCA. "They will once again assume, once the cost pressure is off, Americans and our political process will recede."

Clinton argued that former President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s actually started moving in the right direction toward energy independence, but his successor, Ronald Reagan, "dismantled" that work.

"Because costs were low, people didn't care, didn't complain," she said.

She warned that folks shouldn't be grateful now if oil countries cut prices from near $100 a barrel to $60 or $70, and compared it to trying to boil a frog.

"You put him in hot water, it jumps right out, you put him in cold water and turn up the heat - he's a goner," she said. "We've got to figure out how were going to not be the frog in the cold water anymore."


read the rest and comments at...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2007/12/23/2007-12-23_elect_me_and_oil_prices_instantly_drop_s-1.html?ref=rss

[Abbey Marie]

I think the only thing she hasn't promised us...is the kitchen sink..:coffee:

BY MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Sunday, December 23rd 2007, 4:00 AM

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Hillary Clinton predicted Saturday that just electing her President will cut the price of oil.

When the world hears her commitment at her inauguration about ending American dependence on foreign fuel, Clinton says, oil-pumping countries will lower prices to stifle America's incentive to develop alternative energy.

"I predict to you, the oil-producing countries will drop the price of oil," Clinton said, speaking at the Manchester YWCA. "They will once again assume, once the cost pressure is off, Americans and our political process will recede."

Clinton argued that former President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s actually started moving in the right direction toward energy independence, but his successor, Ronald Reagan, "dismantled" that work.

"Because costs were low, people didn't care, didn't complain," she said.

She warned that folks shouldn't be grateful now if oil countries cut prices from near $100 a barrel to $60 or $70, and compared it to trying to boil a frog.

"You put him in hot water, it jumps right out, you put him in cold water and turn up the heat - he's a goner," she said. "We've got to figure out how were going to not be the frog in the cold water anymore."


read the rest and comments at...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2007/12/23/2007-12-23_elect_me_and_oil_prices_instantly_drop_s-1.html?ref=rss

Apart from the absurdity of the promise, what on earth is the bolded part even supposed to mean? I thought this woman was supposed to be brilliant. She cannot even communicate her thoughts clearly.

[82Marine89]

Apart from the absurdity of the promise, what on earth is the bolded part even supposed to mean? I thought his woman was supposed to be brilliant. She cannot even communicate her thoughts clearly.


"They will once again assume, once the cost pressure is off, Americans and our political process will recede."

That was my thought. WTF? Unless she's talking about taking away our civil liberties they way other presidents are supposedly doing. Maybe she wants to be the next 'Decider'.

[JohnDoe]

I have read about the drop in oil prices if we persue alternative energy LONG before Hillary ever stated this....

The reason other energies like Nuclear and wind and solar will be able to make any headway now in the free market is because oil prices are so high, therefore the investment in them is worth making because they will be lower in price than using oil.

The market drives this....

And if the oil producing countries want to get their share of the energy business at the levels they had been getting they will have to drop their prices in order to compete and or stiffle the support for the other alternative industries.

I believe it was a Discovery Channel special or something like this that i saw this on.

This is still foolish for her to state and act like it is a good thing because it is not a good thing in the sense that we will still be dependent on middle eastern/foreign oil...keeping us involved in perpetual war, or nation building in the middle east and foreign involvement in countries like Venezuela.

jd

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

If she has such a plan why hasn't she or her hubby championed it before now. I think they are doing a HUGE dis service to our country by withholding such a brilliant idea, and the mere thought of her keeping our country in such a state of limbo justifies calls for a pre-emptive IMPEACHMENT hearing.

(******You heard it here, first********* I am the first person in the world to call for IMPEACHMENT of a person who isn't even the President....and it would be a first, too, that a husband and wife were both impeached!!!!!!)

[JohnDoe]

Gadget,

It can't be done now because the republicans and primarily the Bush administration is in bed with the oil industry..... though the market has reacted somewhat on their own....pushing more alternative fuel remedies. But at the same time, congress is still giving the oil industry 13 billion in corporate welfare/pork on the last energy bill... which the republicans insisted on being in there.... or they would not allow the energy bill with alternative incentives, to pass the Senate...

Basically, the oil industry, including the Saudis and others that we buy oil from, know they have a partner with the administration, but Hillary is saying that she will not be their partner and pander to them as this administration has....and they know that she or any other Democrat for that matter that comes in to the presidency will have an energy plan that does not cater to them and go to war for them and allow nothing to be done to promote fuel efficiencies and alternative routes to energy, THEREFORE, the way they will try to attract the market in to buying their oil again at the same levels is to drop the price.

for the first 6 years of this Presidency, there was not any effort to speak about to promote better fuel efficiency cars, or alternative non carbon based fuels....BUT the public, the citizenry has about had it with the high gas/oil prices and Congress basically HAD to do something. If gas prices drop, there won't be such an outcry from the public to get congress to pursue these other alternatives.

There are also measures that only a President can take like releasing some of our fuel reserves on to the market, flooding the market with gas which could also bring the price down....President Bush did not do this at all, while Clinton did back in 1998 or 1999 which dropped gasoline to 95 cents a gallon from about $1.30 a gallon....it only lasted for a short period at below a dollar but it did work.

That is my understanding of it.

jd

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

OK, well then impeach her because she has bad hair.


Gadget,

It can't be done now because the republicans and primarily the Bush administration is in bed with the oil industry..... though the market has reacted somewhat on their own....pushing more alternative fuel remedies. But at the same time, congress is still giving the oil industry 13 billion in corporate welfare/pork on the last energy bill... which the republicans insisted on being in there.... or they would not allow the energy bill with alternative incentives, to pass the Senate...

Basically, the oil industry, including the Saudis and others that we buy oil from, know they have a partner with the administration, but Hillary is saying that she will not be their partner and pander to them as this administration has....and they know that she or any other Democrat for that matter that comes in to the presidency will have an energy plan that does not cater to them and go to war for them and allow nothing to be done to promote fuel efficiencies and alternative routes to energy, THEREFORE, the way they will try to attract the market in to buying their oil again at the same levels is to drop the price.

for the first 6 years of this Presidency, there was not any effort to speak about to promote better fuel efficiency cars, or alternative non carbon based fuels....BUT the public, the citizenry has about had it with the high gas/oil prices and Congress basically HAD to do something. If gas prices drop, there won't be such an outcry from the public to get congress to pursue these other alternatives.

There are also measures that only a President can take like releasing some of our fuel reserves on to the market, flooding the market with gas which could also bring the price down....President Bush did not do this at all, while Clinton did back in 1998 or 1999 which dropped gasoline to 95 cents a gallon from about $1.30 a gallon....it only lasted for a short period at below a dollar but it did work.

That is my understanding of it.

jd

[stephanie]

OK, well then impeach her because she has bad hair.

I wonder if being a "WITCH" could be grounds for impeachment..

Hell they've thought of every reason under the sun to impeach President Bush...:laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Perhaps she would like to detail how she is going to get them to cut price? or why we should rely on them to cut prices rather than finding a way for us to develop our own energy. That would fix not only the rising energy costs, but also our huge national security problem in being dependent on oil.

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

My original point was, and is, that as a civil servant (you know, employed and elected by the citizenry), she is obligated to look out for our welfare, and if she has such a plan, she is negligent in not bringing it forward AT THIS TIME.

If she is not full of hot air, it is her duty to see to it that her plan is worked on and hopefully approved as law, and instituted as a part of our national policy.

Of course it would not require tapping our emergency oil reserves that have been set aside in the case of national emergency ($5 a gallon, or $200 per barrel is not a national emergency, in case you are wondering....an emergency would be a domestic war, or natural disaster that is catastrophic and would incapacitate our ability to refine the petroleum we currently import)

[PostmodernProphet]

"They will once again assume, once the cost pressure is off, Americans and our political process will recede."

/shrugs......gas prices go down, pressure is off, Americans don't push for alternative fuels.....we stay dependant on Suaudi Arabia and Venezuela forever....we should have broken that cycle thirty years ago......I do hope we do it WITHOUT Hillary, though.......

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

/shrugs......gas prices go down, pressure is off, Americans don't push for alternative fuels.....we stay dependant on Suaudi Arabia and Venezuela forever....we should have broken that cycle thirty years ago......I do hope we do it WITHOUT Hillary, though.......

OFF TOPIC....pretty cool, your last post was 1234................

[stephanie]

OFF TOPIC....pretty cool, your last post was 1234................

I wouldn't of noticed it until you pointed it out.....way funny..:laugh2::cheers2:

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

I wouldn't of noticed it until you pointed it out.....way funny..:laugh2::cheers2:

ALRIGHT...why do you insist on changing FMR Marine in to FMC Marine?

[stephanie]

ALRIGHT...why do you insist on changing FMR Marine in to FMC Marine?

Oh no..here I go again...
I always check my spelling through Google cause I'm getting old and my spelling is going downhill...it changes things on it's own that I don't notice(ask glockmail, he's changed to clockmail before he pointed it out to me)... now that you pointed it out...i will take the time to check...see I caught it this time...

Can you..Forgive me????:laugh2::cheers2:

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

Certainly, especially since you are sporting a TLB in you avatar....I will behave, 'cuz mine are staying with me.


Oh no..here I go again...
I always check my spelling through Google cause I'm getting old and my spelling is going downhill...it changes things on it's own that I don't notice(ask glockmail, he's changed to clockmail before he pointed it out to me)... now that you pointed it out...i will take the time to check...see I caught it this time...

Can you..Forgive me????:laugh2::cheers2:

[stephanie]

Certainly, especially since you are sporting a TLB in you avatar....I will behave, 'cuz mine are staying with me.

Thank you for being so understanding..
Even though I never expected anything but...

Merry Christmas my friend....:cheers2:

oh and the TLB should be....TLoBaomwchp...testicle lockbox of Bill and any other man who crosses her path....:laugh2:

[PostmodernProphet]

OFF TOPIC....pretty cool, your last post was 1234................

how can you say I am off topic.....I am specifically responding to a question both you and Abbey discussed........

[red states rule]

Gadget,

It can't be done now because the republicans and primarily the Bush administration is in bed with the oil industry..... though the market has reacted somewhat on their own....pushing more alternative fuel remedies. But at the same time, congress is still giving the oil industry 13 billion in corporate welfare/pork on the last energy bill... which the republicans insisted on being in there.... or they would not allow the energy bill with alternative incentives, to pass the Senate...

Basically, the oil industry, including the Saudis and others that we buy oil from, know they have a partner with the administration, but Hillary is saying that she will not be their partner and pander to them as this administration has....and they know that she or any other Democrat for that matter that comes in to the presidency will have an energy plan that does not cater to them and go to war for them and allow nothing to be done to promote fuel efficiencies and alternative routes to energy, THEREFORE, the way they will try to attract the market in to buying their oil again at the same levels is to drop the price.

for the first 6 years of this Presidency, there was not any effort to speak about to promote better fuel efficiency cars, or alternative non carbon based fuels....BUT the public, the citizenry has about had it with the high gas/oil prices and Congress basically HAD to do something. If gas prices drop, there won't be such an outcry from the public to get congress to pursue these other alternatives.

There are also measures that only a President can take like releasing some of our fuel reserves on to the market, flooding the market with gas which could also bring the price down....President Bush did not do this at all, while Clinton did back in 1998 or 1999 which dropped gasoline to 95 cents a gallon from about $1.30 a gallon....it only lasted for a short period at below a dollar but it did work.

That is my understanding of it.

jd


JD - what has your party done to make the US energy independent? They oppose drilling for more oil, they oppse nuclear power, they oppose the use of coal, and they think higher taxes on oil companies is the answer

Our economy runs on oil, and all the enviro wacko taslking poits will not change the facts

There are huge reserves waiting to be tapped, but libs are more worried about a dman owl in a tree then solving the issue

[April15]

I have tried to find coraboration for this story and so far have not. Can anyone find another source for the story?

[MtnBiker]

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/NEWS09/712200390/-1/NEWS04

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

I was OFF TOPIC......your post number was #1234 of your illustrious career at DP....don't be so sensitive.....geeesh....it's Christmastime.


how can you say I am off topic.....I am specifically responding to a question both you and Abbey discussed........

[MtnBiker]

Why would Mrs Bill Clinton want the price of oil to go down anyway? She is going to just take their profits anyway, she said so herself.

[Sitarro]

JD - what has your party done to make the US energy independent? They oppose drilling for more oil, they oppse nuclear power, they oppose the use of coal, and they think higher taxes on oil companies is the answer

Our economy runs on oil, and all the enviro wacko taslking poits will not change the facts

There are huge reserves waiting to be tapped, but libs are more worried about a dman owl in a tree then solving the issue

I was speaking to a gentleman who has been in the oil business for over 50 years at my favorite cigar shop. He told me that supply of oil isn't the problem, refinery capacity is. There are many full tankers sitting in the Gulf of Mexico with nowhere to drop their cargo. Storage facilities are full, again, nowhere to put the crude. At close to 150 refineries spread across the U.S., many that don't process 20,000 barrels a day, we just don't have the refining capacity needed for the demand.

[MtnBiker]

Are we talking about the price of oil or the price of gasoline?

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

Great point, Sitarro. It seems as though none of our elected officials are willing to pony up any funds to build new refineries, as they are nasty polluting and smelly eye sores.....not in my backyard is their mantra....

Hell, I would rather see us build 150 Nuclear Power facilities to help ween us from the teat of OPEC.




I was speaking to a gentleman who has been in the oil business for over 50 years at my favorite cigar shop. He told me that supply of oil isn't the problem, refinery capacity is. There are many full tankers sitting in the Gulf of Mexico with nowhere to drop their cargo. Storage facilities are full, again, nowhere to put the crude. At close to 150 refineries spread across the U.S., many that don't process 20,000 barrels a day, we just don't have the refining capacity needed for the demand.

[red states rule]

Great point, Sitarro. It seems as though none of our elected officials are willing to pony up any funds to build new refineries, as they are nasty polluting and smelly eye sores.....not in my backyard is their mantra....

Hell, I would rather see us build 150 Nuclear Power facilities to help ween us from the teat of OPEC.

I remember Hillary and the Dems telling us if they won in 06 they would lower gas prices in 2007

What are they waiting for?

[PostmodernProphet]

I was OFF TOPIC......your post number was #1234 of your illustrious career at DP....don't be so sensitive.....geeesh....it's Christmastime.


sorry..../offers you a bit of shiney tinsel in recompense......

[PostmodernProphet]

Great point, Sitarro. It seems as though none of our elected officials are willing to pony up any funds to build new refineries, as they are nasty polluting and smelly eye sores.....not in my backyard is their mantra....

Hell, I would rather see us build 150 Nuclear Power facilities to help ween us from the teat of OPEC.


the problem with that scenario is that nuclear facilities will reduce the need for coal and natural gas generating electic plants....OPEC provides fuel for neither.....nuclear will have no effect on fuel for transportation......mandate all electric vehicles by 2015 and you will watch OPEC cry......

[manu1959]

I was speaking to a gentleman who has been in the oil business for over 50 years at my favorite cigar shop. He told me that supply of oil isn't the problem, refinery capacity is. There are many full tankers sitting in the Gulf of Mexico with nowhere to drop their cargo. Storage facilities are full, again, nowhere to put the crude. At close to 150 refineries spread across the U.S., many that don't process 20,000 barrels a day, we just don't have the refining capacity needed for the demand.

you got it....no new refiners built in something like the last 20 years......

[red states rule]

you got it....no new refiners built in something like the last 20 years......

it is more like 30 years

again, libs and enviro wacko are more worried about a damn owl then the US economy

[Sitarro]

the problem with that scenario is that nuclear facilities will reduce the need for coal and natural gas generating electic plants....OPEC provides fuel for neither.....nuclear will have no effect on fuel for transportation......mandate all electric vehicles by 2015 and you will watch OPEC cry......

This is how much fuel the Queen Mary 2 consumes a day..... about 130,000 gallons. What about all of the thousands of other large ships on the move across the oceans and rivers of this planet. The need for fuel for cars tends to be a proverbial drop in the bucket.

http://www.travelwizard.com/luxurycruise/cunard-cruises/queen-elizabeth-2/

Fuel Consumption: 18.05 tons per hour, or 433 tons per day.

This is equal to six of the ship's swimming pools.
The ship's fuel oil tank capacity of 4,381.4 tonnes is sufficient for 10 days' sailing at 32.5 knots, equalling 7,800 miles.
One gallon of fuel will move the ship 49.5 feet; with the previous steam turbine engines, one gallon of fuel moved the ship 36 feet.

[manu1959]

This is how much fuel the Queen Mary 2 consumes a day..... about 130,000 gallons. What about all of the thousands of other large ships on the move across the oceans and rivers of this planet. The need for fuel for cars tends to be a proverbial drop in the bucket.

http://www.travelwizard.com/luxurycruise/cunard-cruises/queen-elizabeth-2/

Fuel Consumption: 18.05 tons per hour, or 433 tons per day.

This is equal to six of the ship's swimming pools.
The ship's fuel oil tank capacity of 4,381.4 tonnes is sufficient for 10 days' sailing at 32.5 knots, equalling 7,800 miles.
One gallon of fuel will move the ship 49.5 feet; with the previous steam turbine engines, one gallon of fuel moved the ship 36 feet.

well i burn about 16 gallons a week.....so in a year i burn 832......it would take me 156 years to burn that much fuel.....

[April15]

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/NEWS09/712200390/-1/NEWS04
Thank you! Merry Christmas

[red states rule]

Thank you! Merry Christmas

and the smartest women in the world told people to caucus on the wrong day :lol:


http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN2327956420071224

[red states rule]

well i burn about 16 gallons a week.....so in a year i burn 832......it would take me 156 years to burn that much fuel.....

I drive 125 miles round trip to work each day. How much am I contributing to global warming? (or is it global cooling, or global climate change?)

[April15]

Elect me and oil prices instantly drop, says Hillary Clinton in Iowa

BY MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Sunday, December 23rd 2007, 4:00 AM

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Hillary Clinton predicted Saturday that just electing her President will cut the price of oil.

When the world hears her commitment at her inauguration about ending American dependence on foreign fuel, Clinton says, oil-pumping countries will lower prices to stifle America's incentive to develop alternative energy.

"I predict to you, the oil-producing countries will drop the price of oil," Clinton said, speaking at the Manchester YWCA. "They will once again assume, once the cost pressure is off, Americans and our political process will recede."

Clinton argued that former President Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s actually started moving in the right direction toward energy independence, but his successor, Ronald Reagan, "dismantled" that work.

"Because costs were low, people didn't care, didn't complain," she said.

She warned that folks shouldn't be grateful now if oil countries cut prices from near $100 a barrel to $60 or $70, and compared it to trying to boil a frog.

"You put him in hot water, it jumps right out, you put him in cold water and turn up the heat - he's a goner," she said. "We've got to figure out how were going to not be the frog in the cold water anymore."

mmcauliff@nydailynews.com


This from site listed by MtnBker


Clinton touts reliability, resilience

By JENNIFER JACOBS • REGISTER STAFF WRITER • December 20, 2007

* Read Comments(11)
* Recommend
* Print this page
* E-mail this article

* Share this article:
* Del.icio.us
* Facebook
* Digg
* Reddit
* Newsvine
* What’s this?

Elkader, Ia. — It was a steady drumbeat of presidential campaign messages Wednesday for Democrat Hillary Clinton: She's personable, she's reliable, she's an expert in health care.

Clinton acknowledged her likability problem in a vague way by admitting while campaigning in Elkader that she can seem "serious."

"Some people think I am maybe too serious a person," she told a crowd of about 300 at the opera house here. "Well, that's not the way I am all the time. But I think this is a serious election."
Advertisement

Clinton has repeatedly said this week that what she promises, she delivers. In the town of Independence, she vowed to send a defiant message to oil-rich countries that America will lead the way toward energy independence.

"When I stand up in my inaugural address and say to the entire world, particularly the oil-producing countries, 'We're not going to be taken for a ride any longer. We're going to stand up and say enough,' when I say that, those countries will know - because they follow our elections, they follow what we do in our politics as closely as we do - they'll know that I always try to do what I say."

Clinton predicted her words could cause the price of oil to suddenly drop, to $60 or $70 a barrel. Oil, now at about $90 a barrel, was at $20 when President Bush took office, she said.

"They'll try to lull us once again into a false sense of security," she said. "They'll hope that people will say, 'Well, we don't have to change.' Well, they're betting on the wrong horse."

Iowa Energy Center's Norm Olson was skeptical about a new president's ability to have a major impact on the price of oil. "I don't know about that, that's speculation," said Olson, who has not endorsed anyone. "It's going to be tougher to drive the price of oil down anymore."

Clinton arrived in Independence an hour late by car after pea-soup weather prevented her from flying from Des Moines to Waterloo. Later, she canceled a visit to Osage; she'll visit on Saturday instead.

In Elkader, Clinton continued to play up her hardworking side and her ability to learn from failure, including her doomed 1990s health care reform plan.

"I believe that you know more about someone when you see how they respond to setbacks than successes. I've never been the kind of person who gave up in the face of adversity, in case you haven't noticed," she said, to laughter from the audience.

Ensuring every American has health insurance "has been one of the passions of my life," she said.

Supporters offered testimonials that stressed that Clinton is warm and caring - and well-versed in health care.


How the first article derived it's headline from what was said is part of the problem with Americas divide in politics.

[red states rule]

Again, Hilary made the same promise in 06

Libs keep playing their base for fools with crap they possibly deliver on - but the base believes it anyway

[PostmodernProphet]

This is how much fuel the Queen Mary 2 consumes a day.....

fine, but large ships don't run on nuclear fuel either....

[red states rule]

and Hillary also boasted how she wants to seize oil company profits and "invest" them in finding alternative fuel sources

Mark would be proud of her

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

fine, but large ships don't run on nuclear fuel either....

But they could.....I think it would be great if the US were to start the largest fleet of merchant vessels that were nuclear powered. It would help a tremendous amount in lowering consumption.

Congress did just pass legislation requiring an increase in fuel economy....but it will have little to no effect, honestly.....

Electric cars are cool, and all, but still require, well FUEL or energy to charge them, and one also needs to account for the OLD batteries and the disposal needs...could cause another HUGE environmental disaster.

How about this.....http://www.theaircar.com/

http://www.motordeaire.com/ing/index_images/index.jpg

They also have a compressor generator that could basically gernerate its own compressed air for propulsion, making it a completely closed system of self generating its own power, and emitting only fresh O2 into the atmosphere.

[red states rule]

The energy bill Congress just passed was joke. It does nothing to make the US more energy independent, and what they are doing to our cars is insane


snip

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is less about energy and more about control. The most ambitious projections by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy predict it will cut our energy consumption by a whopping 7 percent by 2030.

Yet, it forces products and standards on the American public that could not be achieved in the free market. For instance, it forces automobile manufacturers to increase average fuel economy to 35 mpg by 2020. This mandate will include light trucks, which means your pickup and SUV, heretofore exempt, will now be subject to higher mileage standards. According to J.D. Power & Associates, SUVs, pickups and minivans make up about 60 percent of auto sales. Hybrids' market share is just under 3 percent. People apparently like the safety and comfort of a larger ride, all of which will be sacrificed with higher mileage standards. But it doesn't much matter what you want.

The new bill also mandates a fivefold increase in biofuels like ethanol, which will continue to drive up the price of corn as energy and food interests compete. I drive a flex-fuel vehicle that uses ethanol. I'm all for it but, again, the market should decide, not the government.

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071223/COLUMNIST0130/712230369/1007/OPINION