Lots of buzz on the net regarding Hillary’s take on MTR yesterday. Of the 400+ comments I saw, I didn’t see one person defend her position. Even some of her supporter were up in arms.
Here’s a sample.

David Sassoon over at Solve Climate:

Hillary Clinton Flunks Coal on West Virginia Public Radio:
…No, Senator Clinton, the challenge is, how are we going to stop using coal.

It’s gets worse…

Jesse Jenkins over at WattHead:

Sure sounds like Hillary has drunk the (sour) kool-aid being peddled by coal-front group “Americans for Balanced Energy Choices” (or ABEC, which might as well stand for “American Blowhards Excited about Coal”). Lets compare what Hillary is stumping and what the coal industry’s PR machine has to say:

# Clinton says: “Coal fits in very importantly because obviously, we have a great reserve of coal.”

# Coal industry astroturf campaign says: “Coal is our most abundant fuel. The United States has more coal than any other fuel. A quarter of all of the known coal in the entire world is here in America.”

He goes on, quite entertainingly…

David Roberts over at Grist and Huffington Post:

Her answer was, in my eyes, terribly disappointing.

Eric at RaisingKaine:

…especially for a President. I don’t want to hear that she recognizes that its a difficult situation, I’d like to hear an answer thats proactive and perhaps creative, that’ address both the economic and environmental problems.

Clem Gulatta at WVaBlue

I hope someone asks both Hillary and Obama follow up questions about MTR…both Hillary and Obama know enough about the issue they should not be allowed to weasel out of an answer.

I’d also to know what kind of economic assistance they would be willing to the Appalachian region when there are major economic impacts from their proposed cap-and-trade regimes for carbon emissions. Will it be help directly to workers, consumers, and local citizens or will it be another infusion of corporate welfare like the Bush administration is providing Wall Street this week?

Hillary supporter mgee at MyDD:

I was concerned with Clinton’s hedging on MTR as well; she’s too careful on the subject, as she wants to maintain her lead in WVa – hence, her nod toward coal interests, which the coal barons have always told us (wrongly) are miners’ interests, as well.

I’m disappointed; I say that as a Clinton supporter, and an opponent of MTR.

Prankster at DailyKos:

Hillary Sides with Coal Fat Cats. What Will Barack Do?:
Hillary Clinton went on West Virginia Public Radio this morning and refused to condemn the practice of mountaintop removal mining in West Virginia. To make matter worse, Hillary appeared to support building at least 10 new coal fired power plants, casting her lot with the promoters of so-called “clean coal.”

From the comments of the App Voices blog-post below this one at DailyKos:

Fishoutofwater: hard to believe she has been sitting in on committee meetings on mountaintop removal based on her words here.
karateexplosions:Ending mountaintop removal is necessary, in my opinion, but it is only a first step, and concurrent steps need to be taken to nurture better, healthier economic growth for that region (WV, KY, VA, et al.)
polecat: You’re kidding, right?…After the whole thing has been BULLDOZED you want to put it back?… Blows my mind — even a tyro’s grasp of the subject should yield a better answer than THAT!
jhutson: Clinton is acting willfully ignorant when she speaks of “recovering” these mountaintops. This is not recovery; this is killing jobs, killing streams, and killing some of the most bio-diverse forest habitat on the planet.

And that excludes some of the nastier responses. So, needless to say, people across the country were NOT pleased with her answer.

Update: I’ll keep adding these throughout the day…

Jamie Henn at ItsGettingHotinHere:

Clinton: “Maybe there’s a way to recover those mountaintops . . .”
There is so much wrong with this response. We need to find ways to retrieve the coal? Here’s a better idea: stop burning it in the first place. And I’m sorry, but since when was it “practical” to blow the tops of mountains, destroy communities, threaten people’s lives, and subvert the political process so that corporations could make an extra buck for bribing judges and politicians with?

Clinton’s wavering is another reminder of why it’s so important to continue taking action to fight coal.

DanaWV from her own post on ItsGettingHotinHere:

My favorite part is when she critiques the Bush Administration for canceling the Future Gen Boondoggle Coal plant in Illinois, which means folks — SHE HAS LESS SENSE ABOUT COAL THAN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. And in case you don’t have time to listen — she also likes Mountain Top Removal Coal mining. Thanks Hill.

blueheartinaredstate at The Young Turks:

I’ve lived and worked with the Forest Service in western Virginia and eastern Kentucky. I believe in timber harvest when it’s done. I believe in multiple use of the land, so I ain’t no bleeding heart, granola eating tree-hugger.

Nothing, nothing you’ve ever seen compares to standing on Pine Mountain on the border between Virginia and Kentucky and seeing the moonscape strip mining has made of the mountains. I’ve been trained as both a forest ecologist, geologist and soil scientist. I’ve worked on research projects that try to find vegetation that will live and grow on the land after it’s been strip mined. It ain’t easy. It will take many hundreds of years to “reclaim” this land. The best you can hope for is that you can get enough veg to grow so the whole hillside won’t erode or slide.

captainkona at the WhitesCreek Journal:

Her answer shows two things very clearly:

1) She has no clue what she’s talking about.

2) She will sell the environment to the highest bidders.

LOL! This person wants to be the Dem nominee? She sounded like Bush with the incoherent banter.