Democrats want taxable energy

Recently, California Democrat Sen, Diane Feinstein stated her opposition to a "solar farm" in the Mojave Desert because such a massive undertaking would have environmental implications that run counter to the desert's ecosystem.

The Mojave Desert has been coined the Saudi Arabia of solar energy but it is too environmentally sensitive to "mine" this abundant source of clean energy. Gov. Schwarzenegger aptly responded to the Senator's inane statement by simply saying if you can't have a solar farm in the Mojave Desert where can you have one. On the east coast the Kennedy clan ... staunch Democrats all, are vehemently opposed to a windmill farm off the coast of Cape Cod under the premise that it would be unsightly and might cause ... what they are not sure of but are sure it would lessen their pristine view.

We have elitists on both coasts harping for clean energy sources while at the same time taking the all too familiar stance of "Not in My Backyard." And even if elitists prevail and put the onus for all the clean energy projects to be situated in the great Midwest and central states there are environmentalists who oppose the construction of the new energy grid required to carry the power to where it is most needed, the East Coast and the West Coast.

While this taffy pull continues Europe, China, Japan, India and the Middle East are rapidly turning to nuclear power for their future electricity needs. Where does the United States stand under the guidance of the Obama administration? Nuclear power is not even mentioned as a safe, clean technology to meet the country's power needs.

Nuclear power does not offer the Obama administration the ability to create winners and losers in the advancement of energy alternatives. Only pie in the sky wind, solar and biofuels present President Obama the ability to tax the energy consumer in the guise of helping to wean Americans off foreign oil. This is energy policy at its worst.

Steve Sarich

Grayslake