[kjam22]

So why didn't he just tell the guy the truth. It costs to much to make ethanol. It doesn't make economic sense. It isn't really a part of a solution to our dependence on foriegn oil. Why not just tell him the truth? The guy even asked him again after he explained all of the issues and he says "it's certainly a part of the solution".

Look, I understand the requirements on a politican to get elected. My dad was a politician for 10 years. I'm just saying that some of us give Fred a free ride. We can name any number of other candidates that if they were telling some guy that ethanol was part of the solution to our dependency on middle east oil... we'll the posters here would be slaming him. But it's FRED so.... you know... it's okay.

[22cal]

No, it's not okay for Fred to pander!

All I can say is he does less of it than the other top candidates.

[pookie18]

I get your point. Now just compare Fred overall to all other candidates & stop looking for perfection...even St. Reagan wasn't perfect...

[Prospero]

I was wondering the same thing, about the truth of Ethanol being a net-energy (and inflationary) "non-solution" to foreign energy dependence. Nevertheless, I though Fred's answer was prudent in a room full of Ethanol believers.

"We have to look a the broader picture, and Ethanol will play one part of many that would make up a larger chnage in direction from the direction were heading in now."

That was a soft answer, but a hard answer "wouldn't have prudent at this juncture." Clearly, you should take heart that Fred isn't an Ethanol Disciple of any kind. That was hardly the place to have punched a hole in the Ethanol myth. As it was, I doubt the answer he gave was what those hoping for an Ethanol Is The Answer response.

[Blue Highway]

kjam who is the fiddle player in your band?