This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
VoteVets.org shows the left can throw the war-on-terror punch, too, to support its political causes. They remind Senator Thune that if we really want to beat al-Qaida, we need to stop buying the oil that funds them... and politicians need to stop taking donations from companies doing business with countries that support terror:
I dig this ad... but I wonder: is there a smirk button on Photoshop, or are there graphics folks who make their living combing through news footage searching for politicians looking momentarily dorky (as we all do in snapshots)?
The Predictability of the Sioux Falls City Council is painful to watch
-
Former City Councilor Big T wrote an excellent letter to the editor about
how the citizens need to vote on the new parks’ expenditures. I would
agree, $77 ...
1 day ago
Yes, we'll just put on our liberal fantasy caps, snap our fingers and suddenly no longer need oil. Nice plan.
ReplyDeleteAt the very least, we could drill some of our own oil and get closer to energy independence...but no, liberals whine and stomp up and down every time that comes up, too.
But hey; if you ignore reality then you can pat yourself on the back and believe liberals finally look like they actually give a rip about keeping America safe.
What a pity a few veterans have allowed themselves to be used as pawns for environmental extremists.
So Bob prefers to continue buying oil from nations that use that omoney to kill our soldiers... because developing alternative energy is hard? Seems to me not doing business with foreign oil sellers who support terrorists is a quicker, more moral way to defang terror groups than carpet-bombing or the Green Berets. But Bob prefers to ignore reality by thinking we can just keep burning oil and leave it to future generations to come up with solutions when their backs are really against the energy wall. (But Bob's getting Raptured, so he doesn't have to stick around and deal with the problems of this world. Sigh.)
ReplyDeleteBob-
ReplyDeleteSo you don't disagree with the point that oil sales support terrorism, but feel that moving away from oil as a primary fuel for vehicles is impossible?
What do you think about the Pickens plan to use our abundant natural gas instead of oil?
http://www.pickensplan.com/energy_independence/
(have to click through the don't sign up page, can't directly link)
It appeals to me in that he is very specific, quantifies the problem, and also addresses the fact that it is going to cost us some money to implement. Also check out his section on our domestic oil supplies. It doesn't matter how much we drill locally, we just don't have the reserves.
This is as close to a plan that doesn't use any renewable as I'm aware of currently.
When I first saw this ad, it reminded me of those last minute political ads that both parties run prior to election day, condemning, accusatory and filthy, with no underlying facts to support the claims, simply trying to artificially tear down someone with no basis. Why can't we just stick to our real needs and de-politicize criticism so we actually get something done for a change. Did someone mention "Change"? Still waiting!
ReplyDeleteOh Rod, be serious. Thune is always hovering around Mitch McConnell looking smarmy just to get face time. Yuk yuk.
ReplyDeleteAn anon dropped by to claim that "The US receives the vast majority of it's oil from Canada and Mexico." Problems with this claim:
ReplyDelete(1) It's wrong. The U.S. imported 57% of its oil in 2008. The petroleum import percentages from our top 5 suppliers:
* Canada (19.3%)
* Saudi Arabia (11.8%)
* Mexico (10.1%)
* Venezuela (9.2%)
* Nigeria (7.7%)
29.4% = "vast majority"? I think not.
(2) 18% of our petroleum imports come from Persian Gulf countries, who have a bad tendency to leak money out to terrorists (that's why we're occupying one of them, remember?). Imagine if we had the guts to conserve and windmill and solar-panel our way to replacing that 18% (and maybe even another 9% to get us off Chavez's teat). I'm still not seeing how that plan is bad for America. Or are you "conservatives" having too much fun throwing mudballs to solve the real problem of dependence on foreign fossil fuels?
Hey Rod check out this ad from a few years ago.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTJFdDCPXKw
Looks like John is the right takle this season.
We COULD drill some of our own to replace that bought from people who don't like us. This would be a bridge while we develop more alternative methods of energy and find ways to make them more economical. I don't buy it that we don't have reserves. We do. The libs just refuse to let us use them.
ReplyDeleteThere are many "green" energies being looked at, developed, and being made user friendly. But they aren't available for widespread consumption yet, and we still need oil to run our cars etc. We can't simply junk all our oil consuming cars etc overnight.
It make no sense to condemn the US for buying from foreign powers that don't like us while refusing to let us use what we have in our own lands and waters.
Linda M
I guess the political posturing bothers me most in any of these ads, what our elected official actually accomplish in Washington and how they have convinced themselves they have to act in order to continue in their positions, both parties included.
ReplyDeleteHave we simply fallen into this circullar hole that simply spins and spins rhetoric and nothing constructive ever comes out of the hole?
That's one advantage of local (city-county-school) government. People work together to get something accomplished without partisan consideration. Once political parties enter, productivity goes out the window.