Another pro-coal editorial
This morning's editorial, "Paying Price for Assault on Coal," joins the long list of previous war-on-coal opinion pieces. Unlike a number of these editorials, however, this one cites some statistics beyond the usual "$1000 electric bills" that is sometimes used to support the editorial's points. Unfortunately, the . . .
Trump's Monday energy speech
Yesterday's local "newspapers" used an AP report to cover candidate Trump's energy address. Consequently, they missed his comments about reviving the coal industry. (That, or they're saving them for a later editorial.) Other newspapers did cover them. Here is what the Wall Street Journal . . .
Even when it isn't
For most Republicans, Fox News, and our local "newspapers," it's always Obama's fault. And it's always been his fault. (My favorite Republican example is the survey of Louisiana Republicans that held Obama, rather than George Bush, responsible for the damage caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. I also assume you saw that . . .
Just another Intelligencer editorial
Yesterday's editorial is a two-for-one. Not only does the editorial purposely distort for its own purposes President Obama's use of the word "crazy," it lies about the use of alternatives.
Here are the last four paragraphs:
So no one is attempting to keep consumers, through the utilities that serve them, from relying more . . .
(with August 26 update)
Yesterday's News-Register carried an AP report, "Obama Pushes More Clean Energy." This morning's Intelligencer did not carry the AP report but that did not prevent them from editorializing against Obama based upon what was in the report. (Just a thought -- we know the Intelligencer would never misrepresent what the president . . .
The Tuesday editorial on alternative energy
The Intelligencer is once again shilling for the fossil fuel industry - this time in its lead editorial, "Ohio Right on Renewables." The editorial begins:
Renewable portfolio standards were quite trendy for state governments a while back. In fact, 30 states now have in place mandates that require greater use of energy sources such . . .
Which has the more promising future?
Tolerating the Intelligencer's Absurd Claims
Another week, another anti-Obama and anti-EPA Intelligencer editorial this time with an attack on alternative energy sources thrown in as a bonus.
Yesterday's "Tolerating EPA’s Absurd Claims" rounds-up the usual suspects in order to attack alternative energy sources. The problem, . . .