Tom Friedman, one of those op-ed columnists who have lost their moral compass and intellectual vigor in George Bush's America, for whatever reason, occasionally still has an intelligent thought.
Tom Friedman: A New Grip on 'Reality'
There is a split emerging among conservatives on the issue of America's energy dependence. One of the most important laws of political debate is this: To name something is to own it. If you can name something, get that name to stick and therefore define how people think about an issue, your opponents don't stand a chance. One of the most pernicious things that Vice President Dick Cheney and Big Oil have done for years is to define “realism” when it comes to U.S. energy policy — and therefore they have owned the debate.If you listen to them, they always offer this patronizing, pat-you-on-the-head view about alternative energy — hybrids, wind, solar, ethanol — which goes like this: “Yes, yes, those are all very cute and virtuous, but not realistic. Real men know that oil and fossil fuels are going to dominate our energy usage for a long time, so get used to it.”
Well, here's what's encouraging today. There is a split emerging among conservatives on this issue. Not all conservatives are in the pocket of Big Oil. Many evangelicals, led by people like Gary Bauer, are going green — both because they believe that we need to be better stewards of God's green earth and because they don't like being dependent for energy on countries that nurse a deep hostility toward the United States.
Of course, some of those same evangelicals think the rapture is coming soon, and that there is thus no need to worry about the condition the planet is left in. We speculate frequently that Bush is one of those End-is-Nigh types - certainly would explain a lot.
Anyway, Friedman continues by quoting the other Dick, Lugar that is....
Senator Richard Lugar, the Republican who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee...states: “Vice President Cheney, who oversaw Bush administration energy policy, stated on April 30, 2001, ... 'Years down the road, alternative fuels may become a great deal more plentiful than they are today. But we are not yet in any position to stake our economy and our way of life on that possibility. For now, we must take the facts as they are. Whatever our hopes for developing alternative sources and for conserving energy — and that's part of our plan — the reality is that fossil fuels provide virtually 100 percent of our transportation needs and an overwhelming share of our electricity requirements. For years down the road, this will continue to be true.' ”Mr. Lugar then says: “For decades, the energy debate in this country has pitted so-called pro-oil realists against idealistic advocates of alternative energy. The pro-oil commentators have attempted to discredit alternatives by saying they make up a tiny share of energy consumed and that dependence on oil is a choice of the marketplace.
”They assert that our government can and should do little to change this. They have implied that those who have bemoaned oil dependency do not understand that every energy alternative comes with its own problems and limitations.“
While acknowledging that the oil alternatives still require a huge amount of work in order to achieve the necessary scale, Mr. Lugar insists that with a big strategic push we can, and must, get there: ”My message is that the balance of realism has passed from those who argue on behalf of oil and a laissez-faire energy policy that relies on market evolution, to those who recognize that in the absence of a major reorientation in the way we get our energy, life in America is going to be much more difficult in the coming decades. ... No one who is honestly assessing the decline of American leverage around the world due to our energy dependence can fail to see that energy is the albatross of U.S. national security.
“We have entered a different energy era that requires a much different response than in past decades. What is needed is an urgent national campaign led by a succession of presidents and Congresses who will ensure that American ingenuity and resources are fully committed to this problem.”
Friedman goes on with a zinger aimed towards Big Oily Dick:
Dick Cheney regularly dismisses liberals for having a “pre-9/11” mind-set, as opposed to tough guys like him, who have a “post-9/11” mind-set. Hogwash! When it comes to energy, there is no one more pre-9/11, no one more stuck in keeping America addicted to foreign oil, than Dick Cheney.A deep pessimist, Mr. Cheney has an utterly impoverished view of what American technologists can do when asked to do the impossible and an utterly impoverished view of what the American people would do — post-9/11 — if summoned to the great national cause of energy independence.
Tags: Energy
At the "Town Hall" meeting one woman in the audience asked Bush if he thought the war in Iraq was a sign of the apocalypse and if not, why.
He giggled, the audience guffawed . . . and he finally said "I never thought about it like that."
I anxiously await for the "evangelical base" of his to respond.
Lol - I remember that Town Hall (or rather, reading about it). I think Bush hesitated because he knew whatever he said was public record. Couldn't really voice his first response.
Especially if it would have been "hell yeah!"
right - you could almost see the thought bubble above his head.