Article

2010-04-15 Fifth Column

Soros Backed 'Veterans' Organization Backs Cap 'n' Trade

Four out of five veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan think the U.S. would be more secure if the nation were weaned off foreign oil, according to the results of a poll released Tuesday.

The study, conducted by Lake Research Partners in February, also found that 64 percent of the surveyed veterans believe U.S. dependence on foreign energy endangers the lives of our troops by helping funnel money to hostile forces in oil-producing regions.

The survey was commissioned by VoteVets.org, a group that has backed work in Congress to pass broad energy and climate change legislation. It comes as a group of senators try to finish writing a new version of the bill that promotes domestic oil and gas production and nuclear power as well as caps on greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

Jon Soltz, an Iraq War veteran and the chairman of VoteVets.org, said the survey confirms that "veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan know first-hand the destructive effect our dependence on oil has on our national security and on the battlefield."

Among the findings:

73 percent favor a "comprehensive clean energy and climate bill that invests in clean, renewable energy sources in America and limits carbon pollution." That cuts across all branches of the military and both political parties.

62 percent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans believe that if climate change legislation were to pass, the amount of oil the U.S. buys from hostile nations would be reduced.

56 percent say that would translate to less funding for and support that oil-producing countries provide to terrorists.

A plurality don't believe that the passage of climate change legislation would translate to fewer troops deployed in unstable oil-producing regions of the world. 47 percent believe a new climate change law would not affect troop deployment in those areas, compared to 43 percent who do.

Pollster Celinda Lake said the survey is unusual because it drills down to a relatively small portion of the U.S. population -- an "enormously expensive" process that requires different sampling techniques than used for more general surveys. The data has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent, and the sample included 45 percent self-identified Republicans, 25 percent independents and 20 percent Democrats.

VoteVets released the data Tuesday in conjunction with its plans to spend $2.5 million for new TV and Internet ads supporting climate change legislation. The ad features a Purple Heart recipient describing the link between oil profits in Iran to weapons "ending up in the hands of our enemies" in Iraq. The group plans on running the spots nationwide and targeting Alaska, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and North Dakota -- swing states with senators whose votes could be key on a climate change bill.
Major funding for VoteVets.org comes from the Democracy Alliance. Members of the Democracy Alliance include billionaires like George Soros and his son Jonathan Soros, former Rockefeller Family Fund president Anne Bartley, San Francisco Bay Area donors Susie Tompkins Buell and Mark Buell, Hollywood director Rob Reiner, Taco Bell heir Rob McKay, as well as New York financiers like Steven Gluckstern.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-04-15 10:11|| || Front Page|| [10326 views ] Top

#1 Using the vets is a new low. I wholeheartedly support energy independence, domestic production, and new nuclear plants but cap-N-trade won't do it anymore than the health care bill increased access and made costs more affordable for taxpayers. Soros and these tax-exempt foundations always manage to manipulate and squeeze the pulp out of us while exempting themselves and pocketing their billions, often stashing it offshore. I can hear the evil cackles over how stupid the "little people" are all the way from Leona Helmsley's grave in Sleepy Hollow, coincidentally the home of the Rockefeller family compound.

Posted by Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2010-04-15 11:39|| 2010-04-15 11:39|| Front Page Top

#2 I purely hate misleading survey questions and analysis.

We all would like to see the U.S./civilized world weaned off of oil from jihadi and fascist countries (e.g. Venezuela). The question the VoteVets.org survey very carefully didn't ask is how we should accomplish that goal: drill here now, increase the sale price of oil products through tariffs and taxes, subsidize alternative energy possibilities -- and then which ones? Solar, wind, nuclear power, oil from coal, increased natural gas use, better batteries, etc and so forth -- reward energy efficiency at the consumer and commercial levels, paint roofs in the southern half of the country white and in the northern half of the country dark, reward telecommuting, build smaller power plants closer to the users to reduce the energy lost across the power lines...

The ideas present themselves, and most give much better results than cap'n'trade legislation at a significantly lower cost to society. But then, the purpose of cap'n'trade, like the Democrats' health care bill, is to change society rather than achieve the putative aim.

Posted by trailing wife 2010-04-15 15:00|| 2010-04-15 15:00|| Front Page Top

08:27 Skidmark
08:26 Skidmark
08:16 Skidmark
08:12 Skidmark
08:04 Skidmark
07:39 Jack+Creanter7508
07:39 Gluson
07:37 Jack+Creanter7508
07:35 Jack+Creanter7508
07:06 Skidmark
05:59 Frank G
05:49 Super Hose
05:48 Frank G
05:45 Super Hose
05:43 Super Hose
05:43 Gloluns Turkeyneck4904
05:41 Super Hose
05:16 NN2N1
04:59 NN2N1
04:46 NN2N1
03:57 Whiskey Mike
03:36 RJ45ACP
03:30 RJ45ACP
01:03 Grom the Affective