There is no question that Mr. Boucher has been a strong advocate for the coal industry over the years.  He is to be commended and applauded for that.

However, here is the problem.  Intellectually dishonest?

Similar to “Gun Issues” discussed under that category on this website, Mr. Boucher also promoted Barack Obama as a “friend of coal” to constituents of the 9th District during the 2008 campaign.  Boucher “suggested to him [Obama] particular strategies that have worked for us”, noting that “ads related to the coal industry and targeting issues such as respect for gun rights were among the suggestions given.”

Campaign ads were run which were titled “Obama leads the fight for clean coal”.

Boucher proclaimed that Obama was a “friend to gun owners”.  Yet, the National Rifle Association exposed that claim as an absolute joke, citing Obama’s actual record on gun rights BEFORE he ran for President.  The NRA stated that ”Sen. Obama would be the most ani-gun president in American history”.

If Mr. Boucher’s claim of Obama being a ”friend of gun owners” was exposed as a farce, then what about his claim of Obama being “a friend of coal”?  What about Obama’s track record BEFORE he decided to run for President?  And what about his comments about coal (that were caught on tape) while in San Francisco in January, 2008?.  Obama – “So if someone wants to build a coal-fired plant, they can.  It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted”.

Mr. Boucher told us that those words were taken “out of context”?  After hearing the words verbatum – videotaped – you be the judge.

And what about Joe Biden claiming to be a “hard coal miner” when he campaigned in Lebanon, Virginia on September 15, 2008 saying “it’s good to be back in coal country”.  Yet, TWO DAYS later in a videotaped exchange with an environmental campaigner in Ohio, Biden was caught on tape  saying that he and Sen Obama “are not supporting clean coal”.  Biden added, “No coal plants here in America”.  That was in response to the question of why he and Obama would back the expensive prospect of capturing and storing carbon dioxide emitted from coal-fired power plants.

Rick Boucher stated, “Senator Obama truly is a friend of the coal industry”.  He added, “His record … and his position in terms of the coal industry’s future give us confidence”.  Remember Boucher’s comments about Obama’s friendly record on gun rights?

Boucher also later stated that “We knew he would not carry the 9th District but the idea was for him [Obama] to perform well enough here to carry the state.”

What, or whom do you believe?

Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito of WEST VIRGINIA stated, “They are saying one thing in front of a large group, and when they actually are asked their true feelings, that’s when we really hear the attacks on coal”. 

On August 8, 2007, Biden was recorded as saying to reporter Amanda Grisom Little the following:  “I don’t think there’s much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I think there’s much of a role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change.  CLEAN COAL IS NOT THE WAY TO GO IN THE UNITED STATES because we have other, cleaner alternatives”.

It is almost unanimously agreed that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is many years from coming to fruition in the U.S.  It is also generally agreed that Obama’s stance on coal has been all over the spectrum.  Even the Obama-friendly “Los Angeles Times” on June 13, 2007 stated, “Sen. Obama on Tuesday backtracked from his long-held support for a controversial plan to promote the use of coal as an alternative fuel to power motor vehicles.”  The article went on to say “Obama seemed to be making his choice clear: pledging to oppose any plan to turn coal into liquid fuel unless it adhered to strict environmental safeguards” … “an e-mail from Obama’s staff stated that unless and until this technology is perfected, Senator Obama will not support the development of any coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels. ” … “But it sparked confusion among coal industry officials, who until Tuesday had viewed Obama as an ally on the issue, and drew cheers from environmentalists, who described it as a change.” … “Although some activists welcomed Obama’s changed stance on the coal legislation, industry officials on Tuesday were trying to make sense of his apparent change of heart.”

Whew.

Obama’s stance on coal gets even more confusing!  On his website in September, 2008 it stated under the heading “Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology” :  “Obama’s Dept. of Energy will enter into public private partnerships to develop five “first of a kind” commercial scale coal-fired plants with clean carbon capture and sequestration technology”.

A review of Obama’s stated positions and legislative actions on coal show that he is mostly relatively pro-coal.  However, in 2007, he switched gears and voted AGAINST the very legislation that he and Sen Jim Bunning (R-Ky) had earlier sponsored!  Consider the following quote from “Denver’s Magazine 5280″ on Sept. 29, 2008:  “After co-sponsoring legislation earlier this year for billions of dollars in subsidies for liquefied coal, Obama more recently began qualifying his support in ways that have left both environmentalists and coal industry officials UNSURE WHERE HE STANDS”.  …. “Last week, Obama voted AGAINST coal-to-liquid incentives proposed by Bunning, DESPITE TEAMING UP WITH HIM SIX MONTHS AGO.”

The bottom line is …. whom do you believe?  Like the gun issue, was Mr. Boucher less than honest about the real Obama and Biden as to their stance on coal?  Was it simply “tell them what they want to hear” so that Boucher could help deliver Virginia to a blue state for the Democrats?

Time will be the judge.