While I was writing about last night's West Virginia gubernatorial debate there was another debate going on between the Republican and Democratic vice presidential candidates. The statements of Mike Pence and Tim Kaine have been fact-checked here and here and apparently the "war on coal" did play a part in the debate. Here is . . .
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 . . .
The editorial is a prime example
The editorial starts by discussing a WalletHub study of state-by-state energy costs. The study found that West Virginia was the 25th most expensive state while Ohio was 17th. What appears to upset the editorial writer, however, is that California is one of the least-expensive states coming in at #45:
As encouraging as the WalletHub study is . . .
That didn't take long -- one day to be precise (see the last paragraph of the previous post). This morning's Intelligencer editorial is back to praising West Virginians for being smarter than everyone else and for fighting the good fight on the use of coal:
West Virginians were reminded Tuesday night of why, when it comes to . . .
The local "newspapers" and state politicians, with a few exceptions, continue to blame most of coal's decline on President Obama and the EPA. It's the easy thing to do but it compounds the problem of turning the state around because simply voting "for coal" in the next election will do nothing to change the market . . .
Republicans, Democrats, and West Virginians
American opinion on climate change is shifting
I think that the United States is slowly changing attitudes on climate change. It isn't happening rapidly but I believe there are some subtle changes occurring.
Polls, though still showing partisan differences, demonstrate increasing support for action for climate change in both political . . .
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 . . .