At any rate, using food crops for fuel is a horrible, horrible idea. We need to get our ethanol from non-consumable sources. Otherwise the price of food will begin to reflect the overinflated prices we’re paying for gas.

Oops, wrong kind.

Since arriving on Capitol Hill, Obama has been as assiduous as any member of Congress in promoting ethanol. 22. ADM has apparently not contributed money to Obama, but during his first year in office he traveled on the company’s private jets at least twice. All told, Obama took twenty-three flights on corporate planes; after some atypically bad press for accepting the flights, Obama imposed a ban at his office on privately subsidized travel. He has introduced a number of measures that benefit the industry—such as the “Obama Amendment” that offered oil companies a 50 percent tax credit for building stations that offer E85 fuel—and voted for the corporate-welfare-laden 2005 energy bill, which offered billions in subsidies to ethanol producers as well as lavish incentives for developing cars that run on alternative fuels.

Also…

2. ADM has apparently not contributed money to Obama, but during his first year in office he traveled on the company’s private jets at least twice. All told, Obama took twenty-three flights on corporate planes; after some atypically bad press for accepting the flights, Obama imposed a ban at his office on privately subsidized travel.

As I stated in the story, his state’s interests align with being in favor of corn based ethanol, but it’s time to take a look at the reality of a fuel that simply isn’t sustainable or smart.

Also, how does one explain this statement given his opposition to sugar cane based ethanol?

“Corn-based ethanol is not optimal. I’ve been a big supporter of corn-based ethanol. I come from a corn state — Illinois — and it’s a good transitional technology, but the truth is, it is not as efficient as what the Brazilians are doing with sugar cane.”

It’s obvious he’s not picking the pragmatic solution here.

So no, I’m not kidding. :-)

However, ethanol can be made from many different plants. Switchgrass yields between a 400 and 500 percent more energy from ethanol than it takes to produce (a criticism of corn-based ethanol) and using it does not compete as a food product. Furthermore, it can be grown in areas where corn cannot.

Obama’s support of ethanol as a PART of the solution does not make him a partner with Big corn–it makes him a forward thinker.

If you had bothered to read the rest of the article, you would see some “facts

Jason Furman, the Obama campaign’s economic policy director, said that Obama’s stance on ethanol is based on its merits. He went on to say, “We want to evaluate all our energy subsidies to make sure that taxpayers are getting their money’s worth.” And added Obama favors a range of initiatives aimed at “diversification across countries and sources of energy,” including cellulosic ethanol (read switchgrass, hemp, etc)

Finally, ethanol industry executives and advocates have not made large donations to either candidate for president, an examination of campaign contribution records shows.

They have noted a difference, but that difference has not resulted in action.

This kind of post reads like controversy via soundbyte, rather than controversy based on substance.

“Yes, he seems to be in the pocket of Big Corn. Better than Big Oil, but still a lot more hazardous to our economy and environment than many realize.”

with what evidence? The closest thing you have to evidence is this: He’s friends with Tom Daschle?? This is a **huge** stretch.

Try digging up some past votes for ethanol, or some history of him actually giving in to “Big Corn.” Maybe even “Big Corn” giving him campaign money. These types of things are actual evidence. If you can find anything I’ll gladly state that your accusations are based in reasonable facts.