It’s funny how someone like Reid who is touting the need for renewable energy as the single solution to fight Global Warming would accuse to the coal and power industries of using the “old Hitler lie” as means of putting them in the same category as Hitler. Hitler bad, coal bad! Green energy, good!

The fact is, the “old Hitler lie” (aka, The Big Lie) refers to the theory that if you tell a lie so big that it couldn’t possibly be true, people will actually believe it because, as the theory goes, no one would make up such a colossal lie. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie

I’m not here to debate the actual existence of Global Warming. However, the theory of the Big Lie certainly does apply to Global Warming. If enough people tell the same lie long enough and with enough conviction, the lie becomes the truth. Wouldn’t you agree that this could apply to Global Warming? There seem to be enough scientist that disagree with the findings that support the existence of Global Warming that the “old Hitler lie” certainly could apply!

If you read the full transcript of Reid’s speech, you’d believe that the power companies are in some huge conspiracy to use coal as a source of energy because of some evil underlying motive. The fact is; it is a business decision. If there were ANY truth to the numbers that Reid quoted in his speech, the power companies would be the first to build renewable energy generating plants. The key is to balance our resources to ensure the reliability of the energy supply. Everyone knows that to mitigate risk, you diversify your investment. Putting all of our eggs in the renewable energy basket isn’t good business.

Not sure why Reid’s got his nose so far up Al Gore’s butt. Just a few years ago Reid thought the new coal plants were just what Nevada needed. Now he’s draping his poorly based arguments against them in religious rhetoric to stir the emotions of the masses. This only makes getting to the truth that much harder. If Reid had any chance of actually using the facts to support his cause, he wouldn’t need to go to these extremes!

It's sad to see what passes as "journalism" these days. I'm thrilled that there are people willing to take the time to help dispel the myths that people like Ms Sweet are so fond of spreading.

The cute trick of including a "link" to the WSJ article (to create some sense of credibility to her comments) most likely works on many readers. However, if she truly wanted to provide the reader with the opportunity to read more for themselves, the link would actually lead you to the WSJ. Sorry, it doesn’t! If you are interested, copy and paste this in your browser.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12020907...

Thanks "Educateyourself" for pointing out Economics 101. Not sure why so many aspects of the general media love to twist basic info to make a point and get people mad. Here's another Econ 101 lesson. The article comments on the "...more than 100 percent increase in electric rates over the last two decades..." as being a bad thing. Housing costs typically double on average every 10 years. Vegas saw housing prices double in the last 5. Prices go up. It's a fact of life. According to the article, it took 20 years for power rates to double. That's a much slower rate of increase than just about any other major commodity. How much did you pay for a gallon of gas 20 years ago?

I guess they don't require so called "journalists" to take any business classes. Not sure why Sweet, P. chooses to write about business when her article make’s it obvious that she either doesn’t know anything about business or thinks is just OK to ignore all the fundamentals of economics just to try and make her point.

Dear Sweet, please try to make it a little harder next time for us to pick apart your article. This was a little too easy. Better yet, try writing a gossip column or about anything other than business that doesn't require facts.