Thursday, February 02, 2006
Okay, now we are getting somewhere
The State of this Union is addicted to oil. I must admit that Bushes speech is a step in the right direction. My first reaction was "hey, republicans don't say things like this, do they?" I got a little territorial. I think that reaction shows I am caught up in the Bi-partisan conflict. An interesting thing happened the day after the speech. My wife Andrea's class mates talked about our dependence on oil, like Bush came up with the idea. Republicans around me magically became aware of our responsibility to the environment. Maybe they where aware but didn't vocalize it. Interesting thing number two, was the local news. They started talking about fuel alternatives. They where exposing alternatives that would allow people to say close to there life styles. Maybe we as a country had to hear this from a conservative president. I hope this is something both sides can get behind. We can change. With that change, we can be better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/666whcpq.asp
Since you are interested what other parties think I thought I would direct your attention to this article, Gian.
I think that this pretty well sums up what free-marketers think about oil dependency and the way to get out of it.
I think it would be unfair to say that Republicans think that Bush came up with the idea of needing to rid dependency on foriegn oil simply because a few people said something about it. This has been an issue for years, but has only recently become more urgent in the eyes of the public and the man with all the solutions to these problems, Thomas Friedman. Keep in mind that there has been no energy policy in congress since the time Nixon was president. There've been chances for Democrats to address this issue in the past.
Additionally, I think it would also be very unfair to say that Republicans are against environmental protection merely becasue they aren't quite as willing to allow it to hurt the economy in the short run as Democrats say they are. (I sent you an opinion article on that matter).
Much has been made of how horrrible the President has been to the environment, but I have been unconvinced. This mostly becasue I have not seen any numbers to back up such accusations. How have things gotten worse since President Clinton was oin office? It seems to be an allegation that we're supposed to accept at face value--a sound bit like "Bush lied, people died." It's a bit more complex than categorical statements like "the worst ______ ever."
I am always curious to read what you think and enjoy your blog.
Allan
Allan, I was hoping you would respond to one of my political posts. I know you to be quite conservative and quite logical. Thank you for giving this another side. It helps me keep things in perspective.
I humbly rephrase my sweeping generalization. When I said "Republicans around me magically became aware of our responsibility to the environment." I ment the uninformed girls in Andreas education major, oh and her conservative teacher or the local news. So you see Allan, I don't get a rational response from conservatives. The people I see around me are approaching politics like there religion. "I obey my leaders" in other words president Bush can do no wrong. I am treated like a blasphemer when I don't trust the president.
The WSJ article was very interesting. I believe the conservative philosophy is part of why we are a great country. I wonder what human being is a true conservative. It seems to me we are hard wired to be hopeful and faithful. We take risks. Maybe I misunderstand but Conservativisam doesn’t seem to leave room for that. I consider myself an idealist. President Bush’s ideal for Iraq is quite a dream. I strongly disagreed with his approach to the war. WMD doesn’t matter to me. We could have tried to be more diplomatic. Instead we said to the world, and I quote “screw you, we are America. We don’t need your help”. That was not really a quote. It was a joke. We said that quote in different words. But, now that we are there, we could try to make democracy stick. That idea is quite unconservetive according to the articles definition. The war in Iraq is Wilsonism. It seems we need logical rational conservativism and hope passion and liberalism. President Clinton may not have imposed an energy policy. I don’t really know what he did for the environment… let me check…there is a long list of things http://www.environmentalcaucus.org/gore.html half on the things on this list are not really that big a deal. Though I would like to point out Al Gore as a real defender of the environment. He has always had the environment as a high priority.
I believe this issue of alternative power is an American problem. We drive to church if it is four blocks away. Our food is quick and cheap and not good for us. The truth is we don’t want an alternative if it means more money or more work.
I will not loose hope. If a president from an oil family will start talking about alternatives then maybe we as a culture are changing. Then reality sets in and I worry that this is just political jockeying.
I use the phrase “what if”. What if Iraq becomes a true autonomous democracy? What if Americans came together to solve the worlds energy crisis?
Post a Comment