In today's Trib a statement was made regarding Romneys views on alternative energy sources. Is this correct that Romney does not support wind or solar energy? Our family just installed solar for water & electricity. Our electric bill is apprx $40 a month and we havent filled the home gas tank in months, we also have geo thermal for a/c and heat. Why is Romney against this type of energy usage? My dad, a rare Mass republican & frugal Yankee believed in not wasting money. I'm a rare IL republican and believe the same thing.

It is not true. Romney supports a comprehensive energy plan including oil, gas, win, solar, and nuclear. What he doesn't support is throwing taxpayer money at his financial supporters pet projects that end up failing and costng taxpayers billions.

I think if you installed solar for your water and electricity, great. However, you should not receive any government incentives to do so, as these alternatives are not economically viable. Government involvement in making an unlevel playing field eliminates the possibility that one day there will be a truly economically viable alternative.

I honestly don't know what the Romney policy is or will be. And yes, I agree, both parties do behave in similar fashion. I just think if someone introduces a product into the marketplace, it needs no incentives because people will buy it. By someone in Washington DC changing the market by favoring their choice, all other choices are at a huge disadvantage.

If Mitt Romney doesn't support offering financial incentives for sustainable energy alternatives and building an infrastructure for the future, I sure hope he will also save our taxpayer money by reeling in the incredible subsidies and incentives offered to the petrochemical industry.

No actually every time some guy at the Fed pumps more money into the system, the dollar devalues and we pay more to import oil.

Hey de-ranged guy, Bush is fishing on a boat somewhere in Texas, did you miss that whole thing?

I hope they select Ron Paul to work in a cabinet position, he's the best we've got in economics.

No need to count chickens, I use Rassmussen. AT last glance Obama had 43%, and with an economy is shambles, it is hard for me to think that even half of the 8% necessary for him to win would vote for him. I know there is the electoral college, but with a 6 point lead for Romney, this one leans toward a landslide win.

The Ryan pick was superb, as tested in your obvious dislike. As for Paul, you see I am not a Republican but Tea Party guy. The Tea Party has so far shown to be correct on all the issues, once the truth comes out. See credit downgrade.

No actually Romney is more of a Democrat from the 1960s and 70s. You see, the Democrat Party has moved so far to the left, that moderates like Romney are considered conservative by beltway empty headed pundits, the places where you feed. I see Romney as our stop to 5 trillion in spending, divisive rhetoric towards people who have money, and more respect for the Contitution. I've been around awhile, and have seen this development start in the Democrat Party using the anti Bush parley into political power. The Republicans betrayed the Tea Party when guys like Boehner caved in during the debt ceiling situation.

Keep repeating the lie, that Ryan lied about the GM plant, and very eventually you convince yourself that he lied. The only problem with it, is Ryan's story is 10000% the truth. The plant in Janesville closed while in production and while Obama was President. Go figure, when you lose the logic angle you create stories about the winners.