Why can't so-called members of the Democratic Party or liberals see any good in the current Administration?  My assessment is that they simply don't want to see any good.  

My guess is that there actually isn't any good to see.

They are looting this country.  Either because they know the end is near, or just because they can.

Not that the Democrats are any better, mind...

The Peak oil Caucus in Congress includes: Roscoe Bartlett(R-MD), Virgil Goode(R-VA), Walter Jones(R-NC), Tom Tancredo(R-CO), Phil Gingrey(R-GA), Randy Kuhl(R-NY), Wayne Gilchrest(R-MD), and John McHugh(R-NY).

We are all familiar with the work of Roscoe Bartlett. I'm curious about the other legislators you have named. What have they done to increase awareness of peak oil? What policies have the advocated to address the peak oil problem?

Republicans and Democrats.  We are all in this together, like it or not.  Multiple points of view are what make America tick.

plunsfo,
Thank you for coming out and stating your position even if the tomatoes are going to come flying your way.

I'm an ardent Bush-basher and yet I agree with you. No good is going to come from us monkeys flinging yet more feces at each other (R's at D's and vise versa) while Mother Nature's cage of reality closes in on us.

However there is one thing you say, "We are all in this together" which really rattles the emotions of the left leaning crowd. You see, Jenna and Barb did not sign up to make the "ultimate sacrifice". They did not run down to New Orleans to pitch in for those "who are doing as best they can for themeselves" (quoting grandma Bush).

Be that as it may, Roscoe Bartlett is still a hero for trying to air out our true problems. We are wasting time chasing after bogeymen "terrorrrrrists" while Mother Nature's trap door closes in on us from the Global Warming, Peak Oil and Global Dimming sidelines.

The problem is one of division of benefits and burdens. There are those who made great profits for themselves by encouraging everyone to pump CO2 into the atmosphere just like the cigarette companies made great profits by encouraging everyone to inhale from Mother Nature's leaves of luxory and by pretending they had plausible deniability. You see this plausible deniability BS being played with harps at the Enron trials. Suddenly the smartest guys in the room are also the dumbest and most innocent guys in the room and we should all cry for them because unnamed "others" hoodwinked them (Lay & Skilling) into signing off on Raptor deals. Right.

Peak oil is not just data points.
It's a debate about our whole way of life.
How did we get onto this gravy train to Helltown and how are we going to slow the train down enough to be able to safely jump off? How are we going to prevent this from happening again?

Let's face it. It wasn't the media that covered the statues at the Justice Department. It was John Ashcroft. It wasn't left wing sympathy that made Terri Schiavo's death a circus. It was Jeb Bush. It wasn't liberal Democrats who proposed giving a $100 rebate to offset gasoline prices. It was Bill Frist.

You say we have a "pathetically ignorant society"... an interesting observation. Perhaps we should ask our leaders why.  

But, of course, if people like you continue to vote Republican, this will never happen.

Now you say we are all in it together like it or not?
Well I DONT like it one bit.  

The fat cats, their big cars and their Super-Sized lifestyles have already taken more than their fair share from the biosphere (and they are conituing to take take take).   After decades of this behavior, these people should have to pay reperations in one way or another to atleast attemp to pay for the damage they have done.  

Why can't so-called members of the Democratic Party or liberals see any good in the current Administration?

step 1) party X gets back into power and passes much needed reforms
step 2) after things work out favorably, party X then implements their "pet" policies (which generally stink)
step 3) once the second phase fails, politicians resort to some time honored populist ploys (which also stink)
step 4) we vote in a new party and proceed back to step 1

In other words the whole "red team" vs "blue team" thing is the root of a lot of problems.  The public is to blame.  Or perhaps the school system is to blame -- we only get taught our glorious past, not the actual unvarnished history.  For an enteraining view of politics read Jim Rogers "Adventure Capitalist".
 

"Positive control over energy supply is one of the unfortunate, but necessary strategies on that agenda (which, sadly, means military action.)  What would you have our Administration do instead?..."

Unfortunately, seeking positive control over energy supply may also lead China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Britain, France, North Korea and/or Israel to military action. I'm sure you all recognize this list of countries known to have nuclear weapons. The fact is, the oil in the Middle East, in Asia and in South America does not belong to the United States any more than the coal in the United States belongs to them. Saying that the oil of the Middle East is a "vital strategic interest" does not give us the right to conquer the Middle East any more than saying that Germany needed the "living room" (lebenstraum) gave them the right to conquer Poland and Russia. It does not matter that this has been our doctrine since the Carte presidency. It just means that our doctrine has been wrong ever since the Carter presidency.

I would have us get our military out of the Middle East immediately, leaving no bases behind. I would have us start a crash program of energy conservation, from an immediate national speed limit to the long-term rebuilding of our cities and our farms on the basis of sustainability.

But of course, that could only be done by political leadership with the long term interests of our society in mind. If the goal of our political leadership - by which I mean both Democrats and Republicans - is to maintain the power and priveleges of the corporate elite regardless of the consequences to the ordinary person, restructuring the society isn't going to happen.

We're going to have to throw all the SOBs out of office, not just a few.

Art Myatt

A Tale of Two Theories

Here are a couple of exerpts:

Bill Clinton reversed Reagan's Supply Side policies, raising taxes on the wealthy and lowering them on the working and middle class. This Demand Side formula was fiercely resisted by Republican leaders in Congress who predicted a stock market crash and another Great Depression. Indeed, every single Republican member of Congress voted against it. It took a tie-breaking vote by Al Gore in the Senate to get the bill passed. What happened?

The economy produced the longest sustained expansion in U.S. history. It created more than 22 million new jobs, the highest level of job creation ever recorded. Unemployment fell to its lowest level in over 30 years. Inflation fell to 2.5% per year compared to the 4.7% average over the prior 12 years. And overall economic growth averaged 4.0% per year compared to 2.8% average growth over the 12 years of the Reagan/Bush administrations.

Another tasty morsel:

The one thing the Supply Side revival did excel at -- not surprisingly -- is debt. Bush turned a $136 billion surplus from Bill Clinton into a $158 billion deficit in his first year. When he took office, the national debt stood at $5.8 trillion. It now stands at $8.1 trillion and is projected to hit $10 trillion by 2008 when Bush's second term is over. The ten-year cumulative deficit forecast by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office has changed from a $5.6 trillion surplus in January 2001 to a $3.4 trillion deficit in March of this year--an almost inconceivable swing of $9 trillion to the worse in only six years.

After more than 17 years of experience with Supply Side economics, we now know beyond doubt that this is not an accident.

These mammoth debts are a huge boon to that rich "base" that Bush loves to coddle. It is they, the very rich, who loan the money to the government to fund its debts. And since more borrowing drives up interest rates, they get to do so at higher and higher rates of return. This is simple supply and demand. By increasing the demand for borrowed money in the economy as a whole, Supply Side deficits drive up the cost, not just of government borrowing, but of ALL borrowing--everything from credit cards and mortgages to car loans and municipal bonds.

In other words, Supply Side economics rewards the rich both coming and going. Higher government debt leads to higher interest rates for all borrowing -- or in their case, lending. And then, they get to pay lower and lower taxes on their higher and higher earnings. It is a magical two-fer worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

The next time some repub starts spouting off about supply-side this and trickle-down that, you can use these handy facts to make him or her look like the evil, yet somehow really stupid, cretin that he or she is.

That anyone supports these nation-destroying fascists is beyond belief. Unless you are rich, and I mean truly rich, you are like a Jew voting for Nazis, an American Indian voting for Custer, a lover of freedom voting for Stalin, or a roach voting for RAID.

People wonder why I feel that right wingers are spectactularly stupid -- read this article and find out why.

First rule of reality: If hitting yourself in the head hurts, quit doing it.

Tax breaks for the rich have NEVER worked, except for the rich. If you want your nation to be around for the next 200 years, I suggest you quit treating reality like an either/or, my team or the highway proposition.

US VS. THEM is not how you deal with reality.

Now, of course, the masters of ignoring the issues will immediately cry out, "But isn't that what you are doing you hypocrite?" NO, YOU RETARDS. I am saying it is republicans vs. the rest of the world in all its complexity. Don't let the Republican's rhetorical tricks of blame, divide and conquer, and nit-picking distract you from their crimes against America.

Read the article. It speaks the simple fact-backed truth.

V

Positive control over energy supply is one of the unfortunate, but necessary strategies on that agenda (which, sadly, means military action.)  What would you have our Administration do instead?...

The analogies between the current admin and pre-WWII Gemany are disturbing, to say the least. Our current course of action will convince the rest of the planet that they have to put a stop to US-istan first and then deal with the other (environment, population, energy) stuff.

The good news is we'll be energy-independent waaay before 2025. The bad news is um, the same thing as the good news.

With that out of the way, here is the great mystery: why are Republicans seemingly incapable of acknowledging any problems? Ever. Global warming, oil depletion, over-population. You name it and they brush it off as the nonsense of hippie Chicken Littles.

Your statement is an over generalization and, frankly, offensive.

* I agree that the statement is offensive as well as untrue ...

snip ... utterly disagree with many of the "Robin Hood" principles of the Democratic Party (which, by the way, is moving waaaay Socialist.)  

* The congressional critters that are Democratic admit they are not only Socialist but favor Communism ...

Why can't so-called members of the Democratic Party or liberals see any good in the current Administration?  My assessment is that they simply don't want to see any good.  And that's a pathetic shame.  

* the real shame is that both parties are just different wings of the same bird ... that is why Bush can not plug the southern border ... the one world globalism has both parties by the balls ...

From my point of view, our country and our planet are in very deep shit.
snip

  We're going to have a hard landing (the CPI results yesterday are just another tick mark on the list) and I believe that the President knows it and has been doing everything he can to make life appear to be "business as usual" for Americans while they figure out what to do and initiate mitigation strategies.

* both parties have dumbed down the American youth - they know exactly what they have done and are doing and why ... that is why we are still in the UN ...

Positive control over energy supply is one of the unfortunate, but necessary strategies on that agenda (which, sadly, means military action.)  What would you have our Administration do instead?...announce to the American people (and simultaneoulsy to the world via CNN) that there won't be enough oil in the next five years to allow the global economy to function well and that the USA will be hit the hardest of any country and people can't drive their precious SUV's anymore?  How would that play out?  Mass panic?...immediate global stock market collapses?...rioting in the streets?  That doesn't sound like a good way to mitigate risk to me.  On the other hand, the Administration has regularly been meeting with other country leaders for well over three years on energy issues.  I suspect they are quietly attempting to come to some resolution, maybe to be announced at the upcoming G8 meeting.

* No, what I expected our leaders to have done was have mined our coal and made our own fuel ... other nations and we as well back our farmers why not the miners and fuel companies - look what hacks the congress has become in making corn fuel - a win fall if there ever was one for the corn farmers of this country - and we DO NOT NEED IT - its cheaper to export it in from the countries that make it from sugar cane ... no difference between Rep and Dem ... We have coal and the means to process it cleanly and that is what is happening under cover - the rail roads are pulling in a nice fat bundle hauling it only they are short on cars and our rail system is a mess ...
   Thats what I expected the last 6 administrations to be have been doing ... instead we have rep's like Waters, Bagdad Jim and etc.  The Clinton administration instead removed one of our largest clean sweet coal fields from being mined here in the west ... put it off limits ... No, I expected our leaders to tell the greenies to go to hell and approve oil drilling off the coast, approve wind farms off the coast, I expected them act like leaders with "balls" and do what was and is best for the nation not for a bunch of briding lobby hacks and union crooks ...

I would even suggest that they knew very well about the peak oil problem back in Clinton's Administration and some of the current policies are developments and building on actions started during that Administration.  I certainly don't agree with everything the President does, and I get downright angry at some things, while some things I think are pretty good.  That doesn't mean he is constantly breaking the law so he can create a police state, steal elections, become a king, plot to bomb the WTC, or practice genocide to further the interests of the U.S., as many liberals would have you believe.  Oh, by the way, I also get pretty pissed off at things the Democrats do and say too.  I just don't categorize all Democrats as stupid...more like, simple.

But today we have a very persuasive media and a pathetically ignorant society who believe that everything they hear from the media is well-researched truth without applying any discursive reasoning or attempts at validation to the information heard.  They have been conditioned not to see the forest for the trees.  It is obvious to even the most casual observer that the media also doesn't seem to want to find any good in the President -- and it's almost impossible to keep anything a secret.  I believe the MSM, in many ways, is actually a threat to the security of our country.

* amen ... we need to do two things immediately 1) Deport all illegals 2) JAIL every congressional memeber until their trail comes up ... they refuse to tell on one another ... fine ... round them up and jail them while everyone of them is investigated and cleared ...

When I find a disparity in understanding with another America, whether Democrat or Republican, instead of angrily debating points or whining to them about "what a criminal Bush is" I tend to attempt to educate them on the issue.  I have taken the time to become well enough informed on the subjects to help them out.  It seems to work better that way.

* As a Republican I find that a Democrat when they find out I am a Republican leave me alone refusing to talking, do not confuse me with facts attitude - I just spent 6 days in the hospital and listened to Rush in the mornings ... a number of the Nurses refused to even take my temperature shifting it off to others ... now thats hate ... two did talk with me and when I admitted I was a Republican and yes I did vote for Bush and no I was sticking by him never returned ... but that was Ok because I gained the attention of the good nurses and got better care ... not a one of them the good, ugly and inbetween ever heard of "peak oil" -

Peak oil and environmental issues won't be solved in a competition between Republicans and Democrats.  We are all in this together, like it or not.  Multiple points of view are what make America tick.  And don't worry, you'll get your chances to get more elected officials that share your point of view again, and again, and again in the future....if in fact those points of view are shared by the majority.  If they are not, then why not try to educate the majority rather than criticise them?  Pull instead of push.

In the meantime, stick to discussing the data on oil depletion and options for preparation.  That's what's important.

* AMEN ...