March 28, 2024, 06:52:59 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: NEW CHILD BOARD CREATED IN THE POLITICAL SECTION FOR THE 2016 ELECTION
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Commentary: Drive naked, save America  (Read 2461 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
nonesuche
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878



« on: August 08, 2008, 03:00:35 PM »

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/07/beck.energy/index.html

By Glenn Beck
CNN

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Call our politicians and tell them to stay on vacation. Call the caribou roaming in Alaska and tell them they're safe. Call the Saudi king and tell him what you really think of his oil.

I, Glenn Beck, a recovering alcoholic rodeo clown, have come up with a solution to America's energy crisis...and you're wearing it.

Look at yourself right now. You've probably got on a shirt, socks, shoes, jewelry, maybe even some pants. Do you have any idea how much all of that weighs?

If people really loved America, they would strip down, leave their clothes at home, and drive around buck naked. That would decrease the weight of our cars, which would increase our gas mileage so dramatically that we probably wouldn't have to drill for any new oil!

Genius, right?

Of course, my idea has about as much of a chance to make a real difference in our energy crisis as the suggestion that Barack Obama recently made.

"Making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing," Obama said. "But we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much."

When The Associated Press asked Obama's campaign for the figures they used to make that claim, they couldn't produce any -- but plenty of other people have.

It turns out that about two-thirds of vehicles already have properly inflated tires. That means we'd likely save somewhere around 800,000 barrels of oil a day if everyone else also complied. Meanwhile, the U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that there are about 86 billion barrels of oil in the areas that we're not allowed to drill. You do the math.

But, facts aside, Obama seemed to be stunned that Republicans would dare ridicule an idea as revolutionary as checking your tire pressure. "They're making fun of a step that every expert says would absolutely reduce our oil consumption," he complained.

No, what they're making fun of is that a guy who, less than two months earlier, was against the gas tax holiday because it was a "gimmick," has suddenly embraced what is essentially a gimmick.

No one, including John McCain, disputes that keeping your tires inflated will help you get better gas mileage. But so will emptying your trunk, buying a hybrid, not using the heat, and driving naked. The point is that none of those things are solutions; they're unsustainable gimmicks that distract people from solving the underlying crisis. They're also exactly the type of things that Obama once claimed he was against.

But, of course, the adoring mainstream media doesn't want to talk about that, they just want to defend Obama's honor.

Michael Grunwald recently wrote an article titled, "The Tire-Gauge Solution: No Joke," that probably would've been harsher on Obama if it was written by Barack himself. It's more love-sonnet than journalism.

"Meanwhile," he wrote, "efficiency experts say that keeping tires inflated can improve gas mileage 3 percent and regular maintenance can add another 4 percent. Many drivers already follow their advice, but if everyone did, we could immediately reduce demand several percentage points. In other words: Obama is right."

Of course he's right; he's Barack Obama, savior of the universe! But one phrase that he used deserves a little more attention: "but if everyone did."

"But if everyone" donated their organs then people wouldn't die waiting for them.

"But if everyone" ate only lettuce then our health care system would be fixed.

"But if everyone" just sent me one dollar then I'd retire with $300 million in the bank.

Of course, the reality is that people still die waiting for organs, obesity is an epidemic, and I'm still writing these columns. That's why saying "but if everyone did" is such a red herring.

Grunwald went on to suggest that perhaps we're just over-thinking this whole "energy crisis" thing. "It's a pretty simple concept," he wrote. "If our use of fossil fuels is increasing our reliance on Middle Eastern dictators while destroying the planet, maybe we ought to use less."

Welcome back to Fantasy Land. Saying "we ought to" is exactly the same as "but if everyone" -- a way to make a ridiculous point sound plausible. It's like saying: We ought to all live in peace and harmony. It's not that easy.

But let's follow his yellow brick road for a second anyway. If we all put on our Jimmy Carter sweaters and used less oil, we'd still need millions of barrels. How about making sure those barrels come from America by starting to drill for it now? We'll never be truly free until we're completely free from Middle Eastern oil.

Not surprisingly, drilling was nowhere to be found in the article, but Grunwald did include plenty of other, "simple" things we can do:

"We can use those twisty carbon fluorescent light bulbs. We can unplug our televisions, computers and phone chargers when we're not using them."

He's living in a dream world! Not only is unplugging a television not going to do a darn thing, it's annoying and almost no one in their right mind will ever, ever, ever, ever do it! Ever!

And finally, just in case you weren't yet sure if Grunwald's article was essentially a commercial for Obama, here's how he ended it:

"It's sad to see (McCain's) campaign adopting the politics of the tire gauge, promoting the fallacy that Americans are powerless to address their own energy problems. Because the truth is: Yes, we can..."

Hmm, let me think, where have I heard "Yes we can" before? Ohhh, that's right, it's what Obama supporters chant at his speeches.

Is Obama's energy policy solely based on tire gauges? No. But can we criticize him for embracing the same kind of gimmicky stall tactics that have gotten us to this place?

Yes. Yes we can.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.
Logged

I continue to stand with the girl.
caesu
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001



« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2008, 03:52:53 PM »

Quote
Obama shot back at a town hall in Ohio Tuesday afternoon, accusing them of lying about his energy plan and ignoring what experts say would reduce gas consumption between 3 and 4 percent.

“It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant,” Obama told a packed gym. “They think it’s funny that they're making fun of something that is actually true. They need to do their homework.”

“Instead of running ads about Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, they should go talk to some energy experts and actually make a difference,” Obama added.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/05/obama-republicans-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/

i think this response by Obama was spot on.
it sums up what the GOP seems to be about now.
Logged

nonesuche
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878



« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2008, 04:27:23 PM »

now how would you know caesu, you admittedly ride a bike !

Inflating tires is a granular piece of the big picture, it's not a fix nor will the rewards eclipse the overarching dilemma we're in.

I found the article pretty funny myself  but it does show up Obama to NOT be a strategist and for that, I'm thankful it does.

Logged

I continue to stand with the girl.
caesu
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001



« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2008, 04:43:43 PM »

now how would you know caesu, you admittedly ride a bike !

Inflating tires is a granular piece of the big picture, it's not a fix nor will the rewards eclipse the overarching dilemma we're in.

I found the article pretty funny myself  but it does show up Obama to NOT be a strategist and for that, I'm thankful it does.



Obama never said that inflating the tires correctly would solve all problems.
but that's exactly what the republicans who take pride in ignorance accuse him of.

more drilling won't work in the short term, apart from a bit in the speculative markets.
inflating tires correctly does however.
there are all different kinds of ways to save energy and bring prices down simultaneously.

and also cycling with with correctly inflated tires makes a immediately felt difference. 
weather is bad here now... i can't cycle as much as i want when i've got the time. 

i saw this glenn beck guy a few times on CNN.
perfect example of one who takes pride in being ignorant.
i think CNN wanted to copy FNC a bit by bringing this guy in.
Logged

nonesuche
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878



« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2008, 05:49:31 PM »

caesu, yes I'm glad you keep your bike tires inflated to protect the family jewels 

The overarching problem is more complex and most of the big fixes will require support from our government to achieve, so at the baselevel we can thank the lying-through-her-teeth Pelosi for adjourning our decision-makers and not addressing her and their public duty. All for the sake of winning in November, for of course the vote might have resulted in some hard choices which would show UP Obama for the facade that he is.

Look at the polls caesu, the smoke and mirrors act is finally catching up to Obama and even his strongest supporters in his own party are beginning to question what cost his flip-flop on key issues, lack of clarity for his own platform, and the panacea "we need change" (but no details) mantra might ultimately bring to the democrats come november.

Clinton also has Obama by his gonads now.......if you doubt that, then just measure how key it was that despite him not giving Obama his full endorsement he will still have a THE premier speaking slot at the convention. Stay tuned for I think the worm is turning....on Obama.

Logged

I continue to stand with the girl.
nonesuche
Monkey All Star Jr.
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878



« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2008, 10:01:44 AM »

John Hofmeister is one of the few in oil today, that is even willing to work closely with government entities to find solutions. He clearly states we are going to have to make some hard choices, but he also respects how large and complex the dilemma is.

when I post about needing a president that can handle the global reach and expanse of the issues before us, the current oil crisis is one of those issues. To date, all I've seen from Obama is more small-minded and limited perspective on this - he should not be speaking about inflating tires but about harnessing what we do know to reduce the current strain of oil on our economy and acting quickly to change that, then working timely and with some sense of urgency (even with other countries) to position us toward a future of multiple energy sources.


http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/may/global050808.html

Shell Oil president decries 'paralysis of partisanship'
4:28 p.m., May 8, 2008--John Hofmeister, president of Shell Oil Co. and adviser to the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Department of Energy, addressed the dangers of the "paralysis of partisanship" in dealing with energy issues before a full house in Mitchell Hall Wednesday evening, May 7.

His talk, “Achieving Energy Security Through Sound Public Policy,” was part of UD's spring semester Global Agenda lecture series titled, “Boiling Point: International Politics of Climate Change.”

Hofmeister described the problem as “a political outcome in which not enough or nothing happens. I would submit to you that we, as citizens of this country, are in a sense the victims of the paralysis of partisanship in our modern history.”

Referring to homeland security and economic security, Hofmeister said that those two issues have seen successful outcomes because they have been addressed and dealt with on a bipartisan basis.

“We have institutions in place that work night and day to make sure that our economic security is always looked at. There are disruptions, there are recessions, but we have the people, the leadership and institutions that have been created on a bipartisan basis that manage economic security on a steady basis,” he said.

The country does not take a bipartisan approach to solving its energy problems, Hofmeister said.

Both Republicans and Democrats have repeatedly blocked proposed energy legislation, Hofmeister said. Proposals to open up the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to increase the domestic supply of oil have been stymied by the Democrats, while President George W. Bush says he will veto a bill to tax oil companies to fund alternative energy research and development, Hofmeister noted, making it difficult for America to come up with stable energy solutions.

Shell Oil has formulated a 12-step program, Hofmeister said, that “enables us to move forward as a society, that enables us to maintain our economic competitiveness and our beloved lifestyle.”

Shell Oil's plan calls for:

**Opening up currently restricted areas to increase domestic oil and gas production;
**Developing unconventional oil and gas resources, specifically the oil shale of Colorado and the oil sands of Canada;
**Using new technology to turn coal into synthetic gas;
**Augmenting the current supply of natural gas with liquefied natural gas;
**Developing biofuels from sources other than those needed for food, such as algae, straw and woodchips;
**Devising new wind technologies;
**Speeding the development of solar energy technology;
**Improving hydrogen energy technology by focusing on developing hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles;
**Controlling carbon dioxide emissions nationwide, not on a state-by-state basis;
**Incentivizing alternative energy solutions to make them more appealing to average Americans;
**Promoting energy education across the nation; and
**Using more nuclear and geothermal energy.

In conclusion, Hofmeister talked about two possible international energy scenarios. He described the first scenario as a “scramble” in which nations would only try to solve their own immediate needs without thinking about the future. The second scenario Hofmeister referred to as “blueprint,” which requires technology sharing among countries and brings nations together to find common solutions to their energy problems.

“Having looked at the future 25-50 years out, it is Shell's view that only a blueprint scenario will work, and blueprint requires anything but the paralysis of partisanship,” Hofmeister said.

Article by Adam Thomas
Photos by Duane Perry
Logged

I continue to stand with the girl.
crazybabyborg
Guest
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2008, 02:33:41 AM »

Worth a watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmIMFgGyJrQ
Logged
crazybabyborg
Guest
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2008, 02:43:15 AM »

Petition to call Congress back, if you are interested:

http://www.callbackcongress.com/thanks.asp
Logged
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use.
Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
 
Page created in 6.241 seconds with 19 queries.