Ultimately, the take away was rather important if you feel that this issue is something our national leader should be concerned about.
It seems that the Republican campaign has been more influenced by the funding of their superpacs, vis a vie big oil and coal, and has made a premptive move to strike global warming from the conversation, instead deaming it a “myth”.
Democrats are pushing for a balanced energy index, and include solar and wind as part of that formula. In the area where coal is still being utilized, the move is for “clean coal.”
The guest speakers on Rehm’s show that morning made an allusion that the Republicans are pro-coal, any kind of coal, clean or not.
Now, my mother grew up in the “heart of coal country”, in Carbondale, Pennslyvania. I have seen the blackened landscape left behind after years of strip mining. In fact, my grandfather would give us a lump of coal at Christmas, just for fun!
Certainly, there have been enough mine accidents to have convinced me that society needs to look for safer alternatives of gathering resources, not to mention the pollutants generated in actually burning coal. Ultimately, what is there to like?
Which brings me back to the Presidential debates- if one candidate is promoting a balanced portfolio of energy resources, I am in agreement. You can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. (Go, Dems!)
But I am disappointed to see the Republicans sell out to big business, at the expense of future generations. I would have hoped for more from a former Govenor of Massachusetts.
Guess you can tell whom I’ll be voting for this November.