Bush does something good for the environment

The other way around. The people above ground were food for the people underground. Whenever the sirens sounded, the folks above ground obediently marched into the tunnels to be eaten. Kind of dumb, really.

 

Unfortunately, similar to our predominantly poor, uneducated young people obediantlly marching off to Cheney's War on command. Only when they are in Iraq do they see their cost.

 

daniel, were you talking about The Time Machine? I thought the above-ground race was originally the masters, and the underground race was factory-worker types who made the food/clothing. Eventually, society broke down and the underground race started hunting the above ground race as food (at night).

Now THERE's a happy thought.

 

Damn! You're right. Except that in The Time Machine the above-ground folks got to live in an Eden until the time came to be monster food. Our poor live in hell until they march off to war. I read that in the first Gulf war, a young Black man's chances of being killed were greater at home than in the war.

Sun__Tzu, I don't remember if they described the "history" of it. I just remember there were only young people above ground, and when the sirens sounded, they marched calmly into the tunnels.

 

GW Bush Intelligence

GW can't be stupid. After all, he flew the Phantom. When Clinton was pushing his book, he said that he called the Demo campaign committee and told them not to underestimate the man. Much as I detest what the man stands for, I don't think he's dumb. That's his schtik.

CR

 

The biggest impediment to the production of alternate energy is the NIMBY effect.

Just try to build a wind or solar farm; or a hydro-electric project; or a tide generator. There are so many local restrictions that the end result is the energy companies way too often simply give up.

Let's see what Kerry proposes when he provides the nitty gritty details of his energy policy. By the way I don't expect miracles; he has already done the NIMBY on a wind project in Nantucket sound and using the SRP to "regulate" gas prices isn't too smart.

Simply raising taxes on gas won't give us a strategic energy policy that:
1. Uses available pertoleum reserves smartly;
2. Creates alternative generation capability that will meet our economy's needs.
3. Builds new distribution systems consistent with the generation capability and the target market.
4. Credits inovation in energy usage.
5. Taxes wasteful energy use,
6. and keeps the economy strong enough to sustain economic growth
etc, etc.

Not an easy task; but a necessary one for our future regardless of which party wins the election.

 

Charley: yeah, I've heard that about Bush too. I'm still undecided as to how dumb he really is, as opposed to how dumb he might want everyone to think he is. If he sets expectations really, really low, then everyone will misunderestimate him. Hence, he's like a Special Ed student: every time he puts both shoes on the right feet, everyone claps.

Don: I think one of the huge advantages of solar is the fact that it can be decentralized. I don't think many people want oil/coal burning power plants (and high-voltage, cancer-causing power lines) in their back yards either. A few solar panels on everyone's roof would avoid the need for a huge solar field. (what exactly is the problem with a solar field anyway? there's no noise or pollution that I know of...)

 

I think he's stupid. That look on his face when they tell him the planes have crashed into the World Trade Towers, it looks like he's saying, "Where's my mommy?"

 

i agree with you 100%. its funny that no has issues with coal burning power plants that spout thick black smoke 24-7, but will complain bitterly about the view being ruined by a windmill farm. makes me think that its not all non-partisan locals making the most noise in these types of situations.

after all, all the oil and automobile companies spend millions to finance a well oiled opinion lobby. how much would it cost to convince a local to pitch a bitch about something that threatens the monopoly that oil, electric and transportation industries have on this country?

 

Re: GW Bush Intelligence

Charley-
I agree that he's not a total idiot about everything. Everybody has some positive attributes. (I hear he's good with armadillos.)It's just that I expect a President to be quick-witted and able to think clearly under stress. That should be unquestionable qualities in someone in so powerful a position. My feeling is that he was selected by GOP bigwigs with the intention that they could convince him to do things for their benefit, and he would, so as to not rock the good ol' boys' boat. If acting disoriented is his schtik, then he has earned an Oscar.

 

So, anything else new?

 

That reminds me of a funny standup routine: after the planes hit the towers, couldn't you just imagine George H.W. Bush appearing on TV and saying: "well, it looks like playtime is over for Junior. Things are getting serious now, so I think I'll be taking over. I'm sure you all understand. No way we let the boy run things during an emergency like this."

 

S_T: "If they took their massive profits and invested in renewable sources like wind and solar, oil companies could easily dominate these new industries (in terms of manufacturing and maintenance) for generations to come. So what's keeping them?"

There is substantial investment by big oil in alternative energy, including photovoltaics. Have you not noticed BP's "Beyond Petroleum" slogan? Shell is promoting biofuel research and solar. In the automotive arena, everyone is putting on green: Ford is promoting its new environmentally friendly Dearborn, MI plant where they are "using paint fumes to power fuel cells to produce electricity."
Toyota and Honda, also large corporations, and thus defined by the Left as evil, are mass producing hybrid vehicles.

Alternative energy cannot not be imposed by government - witness the Carter administration's derelict synfuel plant. It will be marketed by industry when it has reached the point of potential profitability.

Am I the only one Prius owner sporting a "Bush/Cheney 2004" bumpersticker? Let me know if there are any other conservatives out there.

 

The problem is that government IS very heavily subsidizing fossil fuels. It's hard to find financing for a wind farm when massive governmental subsidies keep the cost of coal-fired electricity artificially low.

By all accounts, if fossil fuels and nuclear power had to pay their own real costs, the free market would switch to alternative energy overnight.

 

government subsidies are the reason why gas prices in america are less than half the world average.

 

Actually yeah, I've noticed that most small, local businesses that install solar systems for homes are actually contractors for BP's solar system. And I know BP has a program going where, for every celebrity who buys a BP solar system, BP donates an identical system to a low-income family, essentially eliminating their utility bill for life.

But what I'm looking for is, literally, a solar system on the roof of every single-family US home. It would take a massive initial investment, but would stem the flow of US dollars to foreign countries (not just the Middle East, but Venezuela and Canada too). All that money would be redirected, creating jobs for those people building, designing and installing the systems. And it would also be a win-win way of easing the strain on our aging electrical grid.

Its pretty clear that the energy industry has a powerful lobby in DC. I'd personally like to see a modest tax credit for solar/wind/hydro, and maybe some kind of government subsidized loan to pay for the installation (now waiting for Wolfman's counter : )

I don't really expect oil companies to push solar since it would undercut their primary product, and no industry can seriously be expected to do that (well, maybe high tech). I'm actually puzzled as to why no other industry has tried to break into the solar market. I suppose no one has the capital to take a gamble at something like this.

The reason I want to see government intervention (besides the fact that I'm a liberal, and think Government is the Solution to Everything) is the fact that demand for solar/wind is so low. But its low for the wrong reasons. Its low because electricity comes out of our walls, so we don't think about how it got there. We don't make the connection between air pollution and higher rates of asthma. Or ozone depletion and skin cancer. Turning on a light is three or four degrees removed from all these negative consequences, so most people don't even realize the national cost in medical bills, medicine and lost work days caused by environmental conditions. People only see the $20k price tag on a solar unit and balk. I think that's very unfortunate, and I'd like to see industry and/or government change that. I really don't care which.



About your Bush/Cheney bumper sticker: its funny you should mention that. A few weeks ago, I started noticing that every Bush/Cheney bumper sticker I saw was mounted on an SUV. I've seen maybe a dozen so far (and about a bajillion Kerry stickers, its a "Blue" area and yes, I think that's a real number), and literally every single one was on an SUV. The Kerry stickers have mostly been on midsized cars, though I have seen a cardboard sign mounted on the back window of a pickup truck, among other places. So I think its pretty cool that there's a Bush/Cheney sticker on a Prius somewhere out there.

I think there use to be a couple conservatives on the board, but they left over some other thread (I think they said "god hates fags" and someone disagreed and then they left; I'm paraphrasing here). To sum up: please don't leave : )

 

Not on this keyboard. My 11 Y/O keeps saying "My daddy will vote for anyone but Bush". Not true, I would have to vote for him if the other choice was Saddam or Osama.
I am willing to give anyone somewhat centrist a shot before wanting Bush to have 4 more years to continue his current policies. For someone in office due to the quirks of the Electoral College, I find it amazing that he drives forward with his "I know what is best" policies as if he had a mandate from 90% of the public.

 

The free enterprise conservative view is simple: It's alright to go hell bent for leather using up current resources because new inovation will generate alternatives for any resource losses. This will go on, ad infinitum. The future generations will be fine.

Remember, "faith based" is one of G.W.s favorite terms.

It's kind of like believing in magic.

 

you say that like there is a solution that wouldnt cost a lot of money.

even the current solution is costing us a fortune. and most of that cost is either unknown or ignored.

 

I really agree with this. Our current "Energy Policy", which is to just keep doing what we're doing, only more of it, completely ignores the cost, impact and implication of the status quo. We abolutely cannot go on using oil at the rate we are. If we do, we are looking at an economic and environmental disaster. And all Bush can do is drill more, give tax credits for Hummers, and and fund the "hydrogen economy" which is a complete sham, because hydrogen is NOT AN ENERGY SOURCE.

I think what a lot of people fail to realize is the vast implications of our failed energy policy.

First, there is the 'war on terrorism'. A large part of the problem could be addressed by an appropriate energy policy. We are literally dumping hundreds of billions of $ into the laps of the terrorists, and doing nothing to stop it. We are also, because of our need for oil, constantly in their face. The fact that there are Islamic extremists isn't the result of our energy policy, but their ability to cause harm and to increase their ranks is greatly advanced by our "energy policy". If it weren't for our need for middle east oil, we wouldn't need to be there.

Second, there is the issue of global climate change, which is absolutely real and a ticking time bomb on humanity. Our nations failure to even begin to address this issue is shameful.

Third, there is the cost. Oil is cheap, but only because we spend billions on the military to insure the free flow of oil through the world, and heavily subsidize fossil fuels over other sources of energy. We open up our public lands to energy companies, build roads for them to access the resources, and then give them the resources for the taking. This is a major subsidy, and only furthers our dependence on the fuels that will eventually run out.

Fourth, there is the economy. I believe I read that Toyota is now the most profitable company in the world (or at lest the most profitable car manufacturer in the world). Our auto industry lobbies against CAFE standards because "it will cost them too much" to meet them. The reality is, if our auto industry doesn't start making more fuel efficient vehicles, they are going to be out of business. Toyota is the world leader in fuel efficient technology, and makes many extremely fuel efficient cars besides the Prius. We are just falling further and further behind, and wasting money developing fuel cells which are just a sham to divert peoples attention from the real issues and make them think something is actually being done.

What we need is an energy policy that considers something beyond Exxons next quarterly return. To get that, we need anyone but Shrub in the White House.