I am not approaching this with any partisanship. I am approaching from the realization a year ago that my grocery bill shot up overnight.
So I investigated, as you should be able to see, maybe. but with a Viola in your face it makes it hard.
Environmentalist wanted us to stop using fossil fuels, and drilling, and using coal.
Get the facts dude, there all up there.
What is going on today has little to do with the environmentalists as how now they see the draw backs of ethanol. I mentioned this above.
I am well aware of both sides of the isle using ethanol for ulterior motives in todays theatre.
That doesnt change the fact that liberal fear mongering and environmentalists are responsable for its propulsion into the market decades ago.

JMJ

And here is the tie that Carter had towards ethanols birth into the market
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2006/10/03/news/local/doc4520b089e4a42955791351.txt
Federal support for the ethanol industry grew from seeds planted in the 1970s by President Jimmy Carter and grew to maturity in the ’80s and ’90s, with prodding from farm-state legislators.
In the throes of the late-1970s energy crisis, President Carter was willing to try just about anything to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil. Ethanol was part of the mix.

In his 1980 State of the Union message, Carter said he wanted the country’s ethanol production to reach 500 million gallons, which was more almost triple the production at the time.

“I don’t think the Carter administration has ever been given enough credit for all the things we did on alternative energy, including ethanol.’said U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa
Iowa ? Hmm.. CORN COUNTRY ! Harkin wasnt too bright then now, was he ? he said this in the 70s

And here is a link with the most extensive and comprehensive list of ties between enviromentlists and etahnol you will find anywhere.
Its a lot of reading , but you should really indulge yourself.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html

“The Clinton administration’s fuel-rule rigging provoked an angry backlash from both liberal and conservative newspapers:
The New York Times: “Ethanol will not clean the air beyond what the 1990 Clean Air Act would already require; nor will it . . . raise farm income very much or significantly cut imports. What the EPA’s rule will do is take money from consumers and taxpayers and hand it over to Archer Daniels Midland.”(77)
The Washington Post: “The misuse of the environmental laws as patronage to benefit narrow economic interests is a mistake.”(78)
The Boston Herald: “The pandering to the farm lobby and big political donors could actually worsen air pollution.”(79)
The Houston Post: “Bad science, bad economics, and politics as usual.”(80)
USA Today: “Nothing is more likely to provoke a round of fat-cat-happiness than an open-ended federal rule that forces manufacturers and consumers to buy federally subsidized ethanol. It’s a pork deal any fool could love.”(81)
The Houston Chronicle: “The requirement that a car’s fuel be made from a renewable source like corn makes no more sense than to demand that its engine be made from wood.”

Look dear master, its not “as simple as that”.
It was an iniative started in the 70s when Carter lied out of stupidity and told the whole country that we would run out of oil in less than 20 years. Bio fuels have been around for decades. Carter only usherd them with a false premise.
But they most recently hae gained a boost in popularity due to all the bull$hit the environmentakist have been feeding us about hoe great it is for the atmosphere.
That has turned out to be a bunch of crap. It is no better or worse for the atmosphere than fossil oil.
Of course the pols on both sides recently have been more than glad to jump on the bandwagon and abuse this medium as a means to use the countrys environmental concerns as a way to get votes by authorizing and voting on subsidies.
You my friend do not understand the issue AT ALL.
It goes way past and ahead of what you think. It was sold to the public by fear mongering, the sky is falling global warming BS and we are running out of oil. Had those three factors not been allowed to be put into play the public would of raised a big stink a long time ago and it never would of made it to the market the way we see it today.

JMJ;
“As for the popularity of congress, it’s a good thing that it’s low. The popularity of individual representatives is actually pretty high,”

Thats one of the most intellectually deificient and disengenuous things I’ve heard in a while.
If the individuals are so freaking hot then they should be able to work as a team.
How can it be a good thing when voters feel let down and betrayed by a bunch of useless saps ?

JMJ;
“Polls also desicively show that the public is leaning toward Democrats on all levels of government. The ration of self-described Democrats to Republicans is the greatest it’s been since such numbers were collected.”

Thats a lie. Its not on all levels.
http://www.gallup.com/tag/Election%2b2008.aspx
McCain is actually a small margin ahead of Obama or Hillary.
McCain has a 1-percentage point advantage in general election preferences
April 4, 2008Democratic voters prefer Barack Obama as the party’s presidential nominee by 49% to 44% over Hillary Clinton, a slight improvement for Obama compared with recent days. John McCain has a 1-percentage point advantage over both Obama and Clinton in the latest general election trial heats.More …

And the link I provided above in #29 say differently on your belief that we are leaning towards dems on all levels.
The rest of your rant is just speculative opinionating, so what ?
And everything else is just spewed out randomly in the hope that anyone will take your word for it.

As for the popularity of congress, it’s a good thing that it’s low. The popularity of individual representatives is actually pretty high, especially cimpared with our current failed administration. Polls also desicively show that the public is leaning toward Democrats on all levels of government. The ration of self-described Democrats to Republicans is the greatest it’s been since such numbers were collected.

Face it, the GOP failed and will now return to the political woods until they can find some new ideas. They showed their “true colors” and they turned out to be red for the books, white for racist, and blue for the color of their blood. Just that second issue - the zealous abuse of immigrants - will cost the GOP inestimably for years to come. Hispanics, once a big new voter boon for the GOP will now turn their backs on them, subjugating divisive non-issues like gays and abortion to self-interests like civil rights and labor needs.

JMJ

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/48_say_best_thing_government_can_do_for_economy_is_get_out_of_the_way

Forty-nine percent (49%) of unaffiliated voters agree that the best thing the government can do is get out of the way. Thirty-four percent (34%) disagree.

This is consistent with another recent survey showing that 53% do not want the federal government to help homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgage. However, another The recent survey offers a different perspective– just 23% believe that adequate safeguards are in place to prevent another 1930’s style Depression. Earlier this year, the much-hyped economic stimulus package was given a lukewarm reception by voters.

Thirty-eight percent (38%) of Likely Voters nationwide rate the economy as the top voting issue of Election 2008. The national telephone survey found that 19% consider the War in Iraq as the top issue, 12% name National Security, 10% say Immigration, and 9% believe Health Care is the highest priority. These results are broadly similar to the priorities expressed in January.

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20060722/food.asp
Combustion vs. consumption

“Ethanol plants [are] being built, and they’re starting to pull more corn their way,” comments agricultural economist Chad E. Hart of Iowa State University in Ames. “We’re seeing already higher projected prices than normal for the 2007 crop.”

Predicting that the growth of the ethanol industry could drive up food prices as early as next year, Hart notes that corn futures are trading at about $3 per bushel, or about 50 cents higher than usual.

With demand for corn rising, production is also likely to increase, Hart says. Higher corn prices will lure farmers to devote more acres to cultivating corn and fewer to other crops. That, he says, will encourage “an across-the-board increase in crop prices”—as well as in the price of animal feed derived from such crops.

“If corn price goes up, you’ll probably feel it more in the cost of your steak than the cost of your cornflakes,” Hart says.

Processing, packaging, and distribution costs account for more than 90 percent of the commercial price of cornflakes, bread, and other grain-based products. “Most of the cost of [products such as] bread is not in the cost of the raw materials,” Hart says.

By contrast, the cost of feed for animals and other expenses incurred on livestock farms account for about half of the commercial price of meat and eggs, and nearly a third of the cost of cheese. Therefore, Hart says, higher corn prices aren’t likely to translate into penny-for-penny increases in food costs.

In addition, Hart says, byproducts of ethanol production from corn, such as corn-gluten meal, can be used to feed livestock. That way, not all the corn used to make fuel is diverted from the food supply.

“So the price impact on livestock products will likely be relatively small in comparison to the change in corn prices,” he says.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-detrick/2008/04/04/cnn-reporter-links-rising-food-costs-ethanol
You’re going to need a few extra bucks to pay for those corn flakes every morning.

CNN’s senior business correspondent Ali Velshi let viewers in on an underreported fact about rising commodities prices: the government mandate for ethanol production is making corn and other agricultural products more expensive-making inflation a top priority for Americans.

“Several years ago, we made some decisions about how corn is going to be used to make ethanol, which is added to our gasoline,” said Velshi on “American Morning” April 4. “A number of people think that that was meant to reduce our dependency on crude oil. What is does is it takes what is fundamentally a food source and makes it into a gasoline source. That’s caused corn to go up.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/opinion/19wed1.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
The distortions in agricultural production are startling. Corn prices are up about 50 percent from last year, while soybean prices are projected to rise up to 30 percent in the coming year, as farmers have replaced soy with corn in their fields. The increasing cost of animal feed is raising the prices of dairy and poultry products.

The news from the rest of the world is little better. Ethanol production in the United States and other countries, combined with bad weather and rising demand for animal feed in China, has helped push global grain prices to their highest levels in at least a decade. Earlier this year, rising prices of corn imports from the United States triggered mass protests in Mexico. The chief of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has warned that rising food prices around the world have threatened social unrest in developing countries.

http://www.theindependent.com/stories/03162008/new_foodfuel16.shtml
A recent analysis by economist Tom Elam, Ph.D., president of Farm Econ. for the American Meat Institute, found that U.S. ethanol policy is continuing to drive meat and poultry prices higher.

Elam said he expects food price inflation to rise five or six percent in 2009.

He estimates the cumulative costs to the food industry of the renewable fuel program will be about $100 billion from 2005 to 2010. The program mandates minimum ethanol production and provides tax incentives for ethanol use.

JMJ

The sky is falling

JMJ:
‘this is why they lost the Hill and won’t have it back for years.”

Jersey can tell the future.
Next vote is almost two years. So , I can hang on just a couple years.
Anything is better than than this congress. ( 13% approval ) whoo hoo.

And you can thank environmentalists for your food cost today.
And my wifes crappy new inhalers that are twice as expensive
http://www.greendaily.com/2008/04/01/eco-friendly-inhalers-will-cost-more-green/