'Our next national purpose'

Kenendy said things we hadn't done yet, landing on the moon. McCain just wants to drill more holes for oil, not do soemthing to reduce our dependency. What a fraud....

It amazes me that Barack would hold firm to a vision of a 100% crude oil free United states of America, when, for many aspects of the industrial economy, it would be extremely impractical to use the current alternatives. As far as I know, turbine engines don't really run well on ethanol (say goodbye to the flying man)....corn oil makes a poor lubricant for many industrial mechanical moving parts and engines that run at high temperatures...teflon is made from....baby bottles and other common containers would have a shelf life of a few months with corn based plastic (back to glass!)...your computer which you are typing on is made of....is it realistic to really think we can have a 100% petrol free nation? Possibly but absolutely not in the next 8 years. Retrofitting takes a good many years even if we had feasable technology now for all aspects of industry. (I guess people will now cling to their gasoline cars along with the guns and religeon ...) Why must the solution to energy shortages have to be black and white? (sorry, no pun intended Mr. Obama sir.) Must the solution be ONLY drill? Must the solution be ONLY curb national energy demand?(by mandate if neccessary?) Must the solution be ONLY a petrol free nation? Are all these proposals mutually exclusive? I wonder which candidate supports a blend of some of these solutions?

Am I mistaken or was this NOT in Obama's book.....

This plays well with me. Our way of life and how we move goods and services is based on a ready supply of energy for transportation. We are a spread out country, mass transit only works for a small percentage of the population, sure our mix of truck transport and rail can be readjusted but America still moves by highway. The environmentalists caused this country to become dependent on foreign oil, while precluding our own drilling and now we are paying a heavy price by sending vast sums of money overseas to many unfriendly nations. We must achieve energy independence through a thoughtful multi-phased plan. We can't immediately wish ourselves into energy independence with Obama's undefined push for alternate energy. It takes 3-5 yrs to bring a new vehicle to market and 10 years to clear 80% of the old type off of the road. McCains plan thoughtfully and pragmaticly addresses the near and short term to acheive indepence by 2025.

They SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE SAME PICTURE TOGETHER!!!!!
WHAT A JOKE!

Kudos to Senator McCain for his leadership on this issue. The luddites who oppose nuclear energy, offshore drilling as well as new onshore oil-recovery technologies (e.g. oil shale), wind farms, and drilling in a tiny section of ANWR are anti-progressive. Their arguments are all based on outdated information and fail to acknowledge the technological progress of the last 30-40 years. Yes we need to develop alternative sources and I think all of America is aware of this, but meanwhile we have been shying away from immense domestic reserves which can be gotten SAFELY and will greatly ease the transition to a less carbon-intensive economy. We can't develop new technologies if we're bankrupted by OPEC and our other petroluem-exporting "friends".

McCain and JFK are similiar. One's dead and the other one should be....This is pathetic. If you don't like the price of gas you should walk, ride a bike or take the bus. Or maybe you should get rid of the old SUV...you think. We need a "space program" so lazy Americans can go on being pampered? Pathetic.

Mr McCain, President Kennedy is a fellow Irishman as I am. You Mr McCain are no President Kennedy, nor an Irishman.

There is no way in God's Name that McBush is any where near the Greatness of Kennedy.

Vote for McSame : RIP America.

There is absolutely no way McBush can compare to the Greatness of Kennedy. What colossal nerve to even say this.

Vote McSame -- RIP America

Oh yeah. I REALLY believe you McCain... After all, all those years of republican control. look how much effort was done towards changing our gas consumption habits... If elected will flip-flop on us and state that it will be bad for the economy

This article is embarrassing. To put that picture up and make everyone believe that McCain is comparing himself to JFK is truly insulting. Did you watch the ad? Kennedy's name is not mentioned nor is his likeness ever shown. Media bias at it's finest. Please remove that picture and exhibit the journalistic integrity that Boston readers deserve. Thank you.

We have never been to the moon!

Why don't people just shut off their lights during the day. Studies have shown, 50% of consumed energy in this country is by wasteful uses.

Bill is RIGHT!

There is no mention of Kennedy or picture of him in the ad. Boston.com's headline is inaccurate and misleading.

tthe article states" the ad never mentions that McCain is a Republican". Well, if we don't know that by now we have some problems.

Journalistic Integrity.....that phrase alone is why we will see the death of print newspapers long before McCain kicks the bucket.

First a response to Bill - obviously someone didn't pay attention in school much. The reason for the JFK picture is because of his vision for the space program and even though he's not directly referenced in McCain's ad, it's obvious to whom McCain's people are inferring a reference to.

As for the comments that we can't possible implement mass transport because we're a spread-out country, I think that's a silly argument. Look at countries that are larger geographically than we are and who have very successful train infrastructure - Russia, China and Canada. We've just never bothered to maintain what was once an excellent coast-to-coast system because we became too enamored with plans and cars. Now both are quickly becoming too expensive to utilize.

Trains are infiinitely more fuel efficient relative to the loads they carry than trucks are and vastly safer to have running than the trucks that drive our highways.

Additionally it's ludicrous to blame environmentalists entirely for our problems, they have only sought to protect our world from futher destruction that the world's short-sighted goals have already begun. We as a nation are guilty of our problems for knowing for years what our dependence on oil was causing and choosing to sit on our butts and do nothing to solve the problem before it became the current crisis.

We'll need to make some hard choices, yes. But lets make hard choices that will help us now, rather than drill-drill-drill for more oil that won't help us for 10-20 years and will further line the pockets of big oil. It'd be one thing if all of our oil interests were government run and thus any profits from sales return to us, instead of private corporations

Commenters to blogs and message boards never cease to amazed me. Instead of debating the merits of McCain's Lexington Plan for Energy Independence or discussing his new ad, the yuotube link, they discuss how the Globe pressented the bloggers item. The Globe added the Kennedy image next to McCains not McCain. If the koolaid intoxicated Oamaniacs really understood Kennedy's positions they would see they are more like McCains than Obama's, the DNC of today is not the DNC of 1960.
McCain's ad presents his plan for enregy independence as our next national purpose, much like the commitment to put a man on the moon. The ad doesn't mention Kennedy, its about McCain's plan for our future. Its a plan not a hope.

I take exception to using the name of my hometown for McCain's thinly discuised plan to continue dependance on use of fossil fuels. On the surface it is appealing to use domestic sources as opposed to foreign sources of oil. The truth of the matter is we hit peak oil in USA in 1970 and places like anwr and others just will not produce significant substitution amounts.

This is a distraction form the larger related issue of climate change, and how we can solve both problems at the same time by renewable sources.

For some real solutions see lexgwac.org

Finally ! Could this be true that one of our national leaders is finally going to attempt to get this country to really focus on a long-term solution to our energy policy disaster? We should have done this since 1973. Instead, our compulsive propensity for immediate gratification got us the SUV ... Yeah... we really need a Hummer to haul the groceries from the local A&P ! Imagine, please what today's geopolitics might be if President Ford, or any subsequent administration had focused our national purpose on developing hydrogen technology in the same way that JFK got us all behind the idea of going to the moon. The Hydrogen Economy, by Jeremy Rifkin should be required reading for anyone planning to vote this year

"Republican John McCain.....compares his plan..... to make the country energy independent by 2025 to the President John F. Kennedy's race to the moon."

Senator McCain DOES NOT compare himself to JFK but the PLANS for the race to the moon and his ENERGY PLANS!

We need a comprehensive plan to get ourselves out of this energy crisis...all options need to be on the table! If the Republicans and Democrats can't agree on this, we will continue to be dependant on foreign oil and all the foreign conflict we find ourselves in now. Senator McCain has the experience of crossing the aisle to get things DONE. He is the man!

They SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE SAME PICTURE TOGETHER!!!!!
WHAT A JOKE!

I agree..such an insult to McCain.

Didn't Kennedy get us into Vietnam? Didn't Nixon get us out?

JFK was a Founding Father of the Cold War and started us on a path that cost tens of thousands of American lives and millions of Southwest Asians, but you love him... why?

Nixon got us out of Vietnam, the thing you wanted worse than anything in 1968, but you hate him... why?

Because the media loved Kennedy and hated Nixon and told you to do the same, and of course, you responded with "Baaaaaaa"

Baaa baaa Demmie sheep, have you any bull?
Yes, sir, Yes, sir, three bags full of OBAMA SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!

McCain definitely hit the nail on the head with the energy problem. Only an Apollo-sized effort, (or a Lexington-sized one) will fix our broken energy infrastructure.

This air-conditioned, not-in-my-neighborhood generation is going to have to sacrifice a little and sweat a little to help save our nation. We've got a serious, serious, problem here. This generation doesnt even get it. It's not about the environment. It's about national security. Really. We need to make more energy than we consume, period. Get your freakin acts together, because you're compromising your homeland.

Bout time somebody sized up the situation. Thanks, John. Sign me up.

FINALLY, someone committing to lessen our dependence on foreign oil... they hold us hostage and obviously war isn't the answer. The best thing he could do is offer a huge $$$ prize to develop alternative energies. I still wonder why all those big mouths in Hollywood, sitting in their multi million dollar mansions and talking worthless smack all day (like Hussein Obama with his vague "change" BS) haven't offered something like this. Look at what a huge $$$ prize did for space tourism. They put out a prize and the best engineers responded and came up with a viable space vehicle for tourism in a matter of months! Putting that prize out there was brilliant, but it needs to be even bigger and even more aggressive. Let's get away from all those countries in the Middle East... let them have their oil.

Is anyone going to remove Kevin's comment as inappropriate? I think wishing someone death is a threatening comment.

The lack of respect in these posts speaks volumes. Please get past your hate of the current administration. It bleeds through your posts and dissuades me from reading on.
OK. Bush=Bad. Anything other than Bush=good. McCain=Bush. I get it.
While I don't think McCain brings a whole lot of credibility to the energy discussion, Obama brings no more to this or any other discussion for that matter.
Energy independence is going to require a level of leadership that neither candidate displays. Kennedy offers a recent page from history to which they both can aspire.

As far as I know, Clinton did nothing to address the energy issue in the 90's. Nothing has changed except the price of oil. There was still polution, and it was a known problem. So, now that Al Gore made a movie its suddenly an issue. And it must be Bush's fault, right? This has been a problem for years people, lets just fix it. The solution lies in both alternative energy AND domestic drilling. We will still require oil for the forseeable future.

and for the fool telling me to get rid of my SUV - what if someone needs the space to haul items that are too large to fit into any car? What if the SUV is paid for and I don't have $$ to buy a hybrid? Can you lend me the $$ like a good libral?

Hey A.M. Maynard--do you even know what a Luddite is? Apparently not.

LEXINGTON - W00T! The Republicans just love our fair state. :-)

All you nitwits that are going to vote for Osama better be ready to empty your pockets!! he will raise taxes across the board and can one of you tell me what he stands for??

Why comment when all you print is democratic opinions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd rather have MC'Bush than O' Billa

Let me get this straight - McCain's solution to everything is to drill, drill, drill. How is this different from the current administration? Oh, that's right, on top of that he promises "energy independence"... and we know how politicians always follow through on their promises.

Give me a break. McSame is in the pocket of big oil just as much as the Bushies. He'll tell you whatever you want to hear if only you'll vote for him. Somehow I'm not comforted by a candidate who has been drawing MASSIVE support from Big Oil during his campaign (far moreso than Obama). Wake up people. McCain is out of his freaking gourd. You'll hear him saying a lot of useless crap between now and November. But watch what he does instead of listening to the words coming out of his mouth. Who is in his camp? Lobbyists as far as the eye can see. Big Oil foremost among them. John "I'm going to clean up Washington" McSame is more beholden to special interest groups than any modern candidate besides Dumbya.

McSame is old, senile, and ready to be put to pasture. If he makes it to November without passing away from old age, he is going to get thoroughly romped, and deservedly so. Talk about out of touch.

The reason that The Globe points out that McCain is trying to link himself to JFK is not only because of the images, but because of the words spoken in the ad. The voiceover says "we went to the moon not because it was easy, but because it was hard", which is clearly mimicing JFKs "We choose to go to the moon" speech at Rive Univerisity. Of course McCain doesn'at come outright and say "Vote for me because I'm like Kennedy." He's not a COMPLETE idiot...

For all of you Cambridge McCain haters...here is the alternative (think about it)

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?RsrcID=2036

McCain's sentiment is correct: gaining control of the nexus between the environment, natural resources, and energy consumption will take a man-on-the-moon or Manhattan Project scale operation. The key difference is that in this case, every nation needs to get their man on the moon, not just the U.S. Is McCain going to lead the way in Korea? Iran?? Russia and China?
He is also clever to compare his philosophy to that of a popular Democratic President. Of course, his is the same sentiment expressed by the Dems for a while now, which has been roundly derided by GOP supporters. Nothing new there. But what is striking is the number of comments here which seem to have no basis in anything but fear and confusion-thank goodness these pixels are cheap!

So here's a game for all the highly opinionated (and unburdened by fact) commenters on this blog:

1. Review in detail the energy plans outlined by each candidate. Feel free to include Nader for extra credit.
2. Discuss the relative merits of each platform as you would discuss any issues which do not get your partisan panties in a bunch (paint color, favorite toothpaste, Ginger vs. Mary Ann, etc.) .
3. Make an intelligent, emotionally balanced opinion, share with friends.
4. Repeat steps 1-3 for all issues important to you.
5. Vote.

Good Joke

Senator Obama was seated next to a little girl on an airplane. He turned
to her and said, "Let's talk. I've heard that flights go quicker if you
strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger." The little girl, who had
just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to the Senator, "What
would you like to talk about?"

He said, "Oh, I don't know," "How about nuclear power?" and he smiles.
"OK," she said. "That could be an interesting topic. But let me ask you
a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff-grass.
Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty,
and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?"

Obama, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about
it and says, "Hmmm, I have no idea." To which the little girl replies, "Do
you really feel qualified to discuss nuclear power when you don't know S**T?"

Great concept. We've all been saying we need a Manhattan Project for energy.

1: It would free us from our Saudi landlords
2: It would deflate any awe and reverence the rest of the world has for terror supporting middle east feifdoms
3: It would ensure America's predominance in the global economy for another 50 years
4: It would benefit the economy on par with WW2 production levels
5: The ROI would be in the nbeighborhood of 20-50 times.

But McCain is a republican so coming from his mouth its just a really bad joke.

To Laura Smith and all you women who plan to vote for McCain.......You wonder why there is "gender bias"? Listen to yourselves! You are hiding behind "Obama is inexperienced", but in reality, you are all acting like SPOILED LITTLE GIRLS! You are lashing out because your candidate didn't get nominated. Don't you realize that you are playing right into the hands of those people who denegrate women by giving them more fuel for their fire! Wake Up! McCain is not going to help you with your economy problems, end the war in Iraq, give us healthcare for all, or anything that helps us lower and middle income people who are struggling! Stop acting like "WHINING WOMEN", and forget about McCain! That is what Senator Clinton would want you to do.

McCain's sentiment is correct: gaining control of the nexus between the environment, natural resources, and energy consumption will take a man-on-the-moon or Manhattan Project scale operation. The key difference is that in this case, every nation needs to get their man on the moon, not just the U.S. Is McCain going to lead the way in Korea? Iran?? Russia and China?
He is also clever to compare his philosophy to that of a popular Democratic President. Of course, his is the same sentiment expressed by the Dems for a while now, which has been roundly derided by GOP supporters. Nothing new there. But what is striking is the number of comments here which seem to have no basis in anything but fear and confusion-thank goodness these pixels are cheap!

So here's a game for all the highly opinionated (and unburdened by fact) commenters on this blog:

1. Review in detail the energy plans outlined by each candidate. Feel free to include Nader for extra credit.
2. Discuss the relative merits of each platform as you would discuss any issues which do not get your partisan panties in a bunch (paint color, favorite toothpaste, Ginger vs. Mary Ann, etc.) .
3. Make an intelligent, emotionally balanced opinion, share with friends.
4. Repeat steps 1-3 for all issues important to you.
5. Vote.

We need a multi-pronged plan that places US interests FIRST. We are not going to solve the energy issues, dependence on foreign oil (or dependence on oil) issues....or the 'global warming" issue in 4, 8, 12 years...

What we CAN do is rally the US spirit and display a united front to the rest of the world that is based on US interests. We may have to endure a period of higher prices....generations before ours have had similar struggles for one reason or another. What we cannot do is argue ourselves into oblivion....which is what the two-party situation has caused in the US.

I am not a big "fan" of either candidate...actually...I think Obama is a dangerous individual...we don't need neo-marxism....we need a leader that is interested in cleaning "house" and reinforcing the fundamentals of our culture....I'm not a huge fan of McCain (but he'll get my vote over Obama any day).... HOWEVER - what is this OBSESSION with JFK? Why is it that no one is allowed to make any reference to this man? Anytime this happens....all I hear is "whoa......you're no JFK!"... Absurd...

I think the premise is that we need big ideas and a nation behind these ideas as a common goal in order to rise up and overcome some of our challenges. That is the correlation.

Big ideas. Big ideas.

Response to Obamasucks. That's a real intellengent nickname... How long did it take you to come up with that one Einstein? Kennedy did not get us into Vietnam... we were already there before he was elected. And Nixon did not get us out... the American people got us out. Nixon just surcombed to the onslaught of public outcry. There are documented examples of Kennedy's plans to pull troops OUT OF Viet Nam against the recommendation of leading Generals (and the one's that were profiting from the war). Speaking of war... I just wonder what advancements could have been made over the last 8 years if even half of the three Trilion dollars were spent on alternative energy, rather than on a war that was predicated on lies from Mr. Bush?

Neo-Marxism?

Mr. O'Reilly please put on the white suit. It will soothe you.

Da Target:
First of all, it's O'Leary not O'Reilly (I'll save you the trouble of responding with the obvious, I know, "what’s the difference, all us Irish are the same") If you disagree with my comments, please share your opinions. What of what I said is inaccurate? And I will be happy to put on the white suit as soon as you take off your white hood.

When McCain/Bush first brought this up it was suggesting that we end the federal moratorium, now ol John seems to be saying that he doesn't care what the States want, he wants to drill. He also wants to build nukes, ignoring the fact that no one has yet come up with a safe way to dispose of the waste. What's missing from his Revolutionary war plan is encouraging the alternatives that would make individual Americans energy independent. He caters to big energy, the guys who provide him with a lot of his funding.

Think on this: I worked for an independent oil driller in New Mexico and he said that we are holding off depleting our oil reserves until every drop has been drained from the rest of the world. That's real national security. Drilling now will kill us in the end. Give up the shrill polemics, form a cohesive energy policy and drill when the world is dry.

McCain linking to Kennedy, Sen. Gordon Smith linking to Obama, what gives? Must Republicans pretend to not be Republicans this year to win? And exactly who profits from a policy of, "Drill now! Drill everywhere!" Consumers or Oil companies? I'm as frustrated as anyone with pump prices but the fact that this plan is being aggressively promoted by Big Oil, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, GOP pollster/strategists and John (I'm moving rightward as fast as I can) McCain, speaks volumes. Had the problem of oil-dependence been dealt with, head on, 20, 30 years ago - when OPEC entered public awareness - we might not be having this discussion today.

Really the average American doesn't give a rats tootie where energy comes from just as long as it is not priced so exorbitantly that none can afford to buy any of it. The real problem is the sky roceting price. Therefore Mr. McCain is offering a non solution, because as anyone who makes even a cursory study of the issue of nuclear power's benefits quickly realizes is that nuclear energy costs more than it is worth to produce. Also the price of oil is no longer tied to the supply or demand, but to the greed of speculators, and Mc Cain is not planning to curb the speculators. Therefore drilling more holes will only result in digging ourselves in deeper and prolonging the agony.

What is needed is independence from oil, not oil independence.

P.S. and just for the one post that argued that it is unrealistic to have a petrol free economy, hey we are talking primarily about what it cost you to drive to work, not weather corn oil can run industrial processes.

Yeah, we're all the same. Except some of us can spot a Bill O'Reilly reference.

You asked, so here you go. Please address the following.
1: What is Marxism?
2: What the bleep is neo-Marxism?
3: How is Obama a neo-Marxist?
4: When was the last time you had a thought?

To all who find some measure of meritt in Senator McCain's proposal, step back and consider the ideas from another perspective.

First, untapped oil reserves either proven or suspected in United States territory may sound significant, but in fact are a small fraction of the global totals.

Second, the accelerating demand for oil in the GLOBAL market is driving both the price, and soon the availbility of oil on a global basis. No U.S. policy can alter this fact. Growth in China, India, and other developing economies will simply swamp any increases in production from any reserves worldwide.

Third, even the most optimistic estimates of potential U.S. domestic production from agressive drilling will still only supply a small fraction of our domestic consumption, particularly if we continue to increase consumption due to economic growth and failure to agressively pursue efficiency measures and new energy technologies.

Fourth, due to the combined effects of the first three points, the United States will continue to pay global market price for oil and will remain overwhemingly a net importer of oil. We can do little to alter this except by agressively moving our economy beyond petroleum. This is the future, we must accept it.

The United States has laggged behind the rest of the developed economies in the world in terms of energy efficiency with respect to economic output. The result is we now pay a disporportionate share for energy to achieve the same production - a competitive disadvantage. This is a structural problem in our economy that we need to address. Drilling does not address it, and it is the wrong focus for America.

Oil prices in this country are largely driven by the devaluation of the American dollar, the Candian is worth more! Our currency devalues because of runaway deficit spending and an enormous trade imbalance. Drilling for domestic oil is a chimera solution. We simply cannot produce enough domestically to address the real issues and need to agressively move beyond oil.

Until we accept these incontrovertable truth's, we will continue to decline as a nation and a world power.