Steamd

Last week, the illustrious Ann Coulter did a blog post called THIS IS NOT A DRILL where she yet again takes people’s quotes out of context and doesn’t get the facts in an effort to make her enemy (which pretty much includes any Democrats and people who have even a slight liberal stance) look bad. When she gets it right she gets it mostly right. However, when she gets it wrong she gets it really wrong. Do two wrongs make a right? Let’s see:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, or as she is called on the Big Dogs blog, “the worst speaker in the history of Congress,” explained the cause of high oil prices back in 2006: “We have two oilmen in the White House. The logical follow-up from that is $3-a-gallon gasoline. It is no accident. It is a cause and effect. A cause and effect.”

You’re only partially right, Ann. First, calling Nancy Pelosi the “worst” is a matter of opinion. Personally I don’t have much of an opinion of her really. But her quote was back in 2006. Things were much different two years ago. This quote in particular was in direct response to a plan that Bush outlined in an effort to cut gas prices. Bush’s plan seemed to assume that the pumps at the gast stations were the problem and had less to do with the big oil companies and the situation in the Middle East. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Explain this, Ann: Why are big oil companies getting no-bid oil contracts in Iraq? Even the New York Times said that no-bid contracts like this were unusual. And being that the current administration is all over Iraq, do you think maybe they had something to do with this? Even a little bit? Did Bush’s energy plan in 2006 have anything to do with this? Probably not…but it wouldn’t hurt to investigate it. Who the hell knows!

In response to the 2003 blackout throughout the Northeast U.S. and parts of Canada, Pelosi blamed: “President Bush and Rep. Tom DeLay’s oil-company interests.” The blackout was a failure of humans operating electric power; it had nothing to do with oil. And I’m not even “an oilman.”

Ah-ha! First misquote and misrepresentation of facts.

First of all, the 2003 blackout wasn’t just a “failure of humans”. An investigation found that a failure to trim some trees in parts of Ohio may have been the main cause. However, there was a software bug in the computer systems as well that caused all sorts of problems. The end result was a cascading failure of systems that caused a massive blackout.

This particular event caused rise of many questions regarding the need to upgrade and modernize power grids to avoid catastrophic failures such as these. Many members of congress urged Congress for legislation of a new energy bill. Pelosi herself was among these members. But the efforts were muddled with fights about oil drilling and subsidies for nuclear power and environmental issues. The Bush administration was concentrating its efforts on oil drilling with the energy bill, of which Pelosi replied:

President Bush and Tom DeLay put the interests of the energy companies before the interests of the American people by insisting we drill in A.N.W.R. and other environmentally sensitive areas rather than modernize our energy system.

So, as usual, Ann, you took someone out of context and didn’t read the facts. Don’t assume you know enough.

This must be why the Democrats are nominating B. Hussein Obama, who finished middle school three days ago and has less experience than a person one might choose at random from the audience of “American Idol.”

Obama is a hell of a lot smarter than you. You may have graduated from Cornell University with a law degree but it doesn’t look like you did much as a lawyer. Obama on the other hand graduated from Harvard, was a practicing attorney in Chicago, taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years, and became the Senator of Illinois in 1996. You can’t do all that if you’re a moron. This guy is smart! Smarter than me! Smarter than you! He has more enough experience. He knows a hell of a lot more about what the Constitution says and what it implies than you do. Do you? Hell, when is the last time you’ve even read the Constitution?

Announcing the Democrats’ bold new “plan” on energy last week, Pelosi said breaking into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve “is one alternative.” That’s not an energy plan. It’s using what we already have — much like “conservation,” which is also part of the Democrats’ plan.

No, that’s only one part an energy plan. More drilling is not a solution that has immediate effects. Even it we were to allow oil companies to start drilling in ANWR and other areas we won’t see that oil for at least another 5 years. Pelosi was calling on Bush to tap into the Strategic Petroleum Reserves now so that we can see some immediate effects on gas prices at least within the United States.

Conservation, efficiency and using oil we hold in reserve for emergencies does not get us more energy. It’s as if we were running out of food and the Democrats were telling us: “Just eat a little less every day.” Great! We’ll die a little more slowly. That’s not what we call a “plan.” We need more energy, not a plan for a slower death.

Right, because a Hummer that gets 12 MPG isn’t really a problem. And, um, an analogy about eating less? In a country that has a high rate of obesity that might not be a good analogy.

Conservation and efficiency is only a part of the plan but not an end to a means. No one can deny that using our energy more efficiently is a good thing. Hell, I use fluorescent light bulbs that have the output of a 60 watt light bulb and they only take up 16 watts. That’s the sort efficiency we’re talking about here.

But there’s more! Pelosi announced that the Democrats also plan to push for “an historic investment in biofuels, efficiency, conservation and the rest.” The “rest” is apparently what she called our “important and essential” investment in alternative energy.

That certainly would be historic: We would make history by throwing our money away on unproven energy boondoggles that have eaten up untold billions since the 1960s without producing a single net kilowatt of power while we all starve to death.

Sitting around and saying “Well, we can’t do that! That’s a waste of time!” isn’t a solution either, Ann. More oil and more drilling isn’t a solution. At the very least, investing in the research and development of alternative energy solutions is a start. Again, it’s not the end to a means. It’s just a start. That’s a whole lot better than nothing at all to me.

The proposal to use energy sources that don’t yet produce any energy is like the old New Yorker cartoon with Obama in Muslim garb — no wait, that was a different cartoon. The cartoon is: A scientist has written out his extremely complicated theory on a blackboard and is showing it to another scientist. The theory consists of numbers and characters and takes up the entire blackboard. About two-thirds of the way across, reading left to right, appear the words, “then a miracle happens,” followed by more numbers and characters.

No comment. You dissed both Obama and scientists in the same sentence. Next sentence.

That’s the Democrats’ plan to run cars on biofuels, solar and wind power: Then a miracle happens. The current Democratic mantra on energy is: “We can’t drill our way out of this problem.” Apparently their plan is to talk our way out of this problem.

You make it sound like that’s the only part of the plan. Yes, eventually we’ll be able to rely more on alternative energy sources…but we’re talking years down the line. Biofuels, solar, and wind power are only part of that. Democrats are right, we can’t just drill our way out of this problem because drilling would require five years till we see the results of that drilling. That’s five years we don’t have. Yeah, we could start it..but we would still need to think about what to do that would have immediate effects.

Democrats are also alleging that the oil companies are sitting on millions of acres of oil but are refusing to drill — presumably because oil company executives hate the American people and perversely don’t want to make money. Manifestly, those acres are being explored for oil or have already come up dry.

Because there is much about the oil companies that has many suspicious. Again, I already mentioned something about the no-bid contracts in Iraq. Oil companies are already profitable. And, yes, I do believe that they have reserves that they don’t want to tap into. Think about it. If you were an oil company and you remained profitable, would you want to tap into your reserves if you didn’t have to? No, you would not. You would hold onto your reserves until such a time as you are unable to get any oil from the Middle East or anywhere else for that matter. Think of them as reserved profits.

If the Democrats really wanted oil companies to find more oil, they’d allow oil companies to drill offshore and to drill in ANWR, which we happen to know is bursting with oil.

But they don’t. They don’t want drilling. They don’t want more oil. They want humans to ride bicycles and then to die. We deserve it: We were mean to the polar bears.

Sigh. Now you’re just being melodramatic. Next.

It’s good to know that in the middle of a crisis, the Democrats are still liars. As long as we’re fantasizing about “alternative” energy sources, what we really need is a car that runs on Democrats’ lies.

Again, no comment. This is about as hypocritical as it gets. Ann, your total neo-conservative views are blinding you to the fact that not all Democrats are liars any more than all Republicans are liars. And yet time and time again you yourself have lied in the form of misquotes, the misrepresentation of the facts, and a point of view that all Democrats are liars. It’s not healthy for the Republican party or for the conservative movement, Ann.

The problem is this: our energy policy sucks! And, quite frankly, I don’t care which side solves the problem. All I care about is that someone is actually attempting to get it done. If that means more drilling then do more drilling, but do it in a way that is still environmentally conscience. We do have the technology to drill in a way that is environmentally conscience; why isn’t anyone talking about that? If part of the solution requires tapping into the reserves to provide immediate economic relief then, dammit, just do it!

However, I’m still all for alternative energy sources and I think it would be highly foolish to not invest in the further research and development of these sources, proven or not. The solution to our energy problems is not just one solution; it’s an animal that is multi-layered. Till you understand that you’re never going to get it.

Next time, do your homework, Ann! You really need to get a grip.

P.S.: Read up on the Pickens Plan. Interesting stuff.

Got this little political cartoon in my inbox earlier today:

Here’s the full quote:

We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times… and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.

Question is…what about this statement is wrong? Regardless of whether you believe in global warming or not, energy conservation is something that I think no one can deny is a good thing. Gas is at $4 a gallon and rising with expectations of it getting to $5 a gallon soon and the possibility of it going up to as much as $7 a gallon. At what point will people wake up and realize that there is something wrong? At what point will they stop and realize that they can’t keep pointing fingers at others and see that they are also a part of the problem? Face it…there are a ton of people in America (and many others around the world for that matter) waste so much energy out of pure convenience and materialistic reasons.

People drive big ass trucks, SUVs, and Hummers for no other reason than they just simply want one. Anyone owning a Hummer has no right at all to bitch about the cost of gas. Problem is that people who own Hummers don’t give a shit anyways. The cost of gas could be $10 a gallon and they’ll still keep driving the damn thing.

And judging from the sheer population of obese people in America, I’d say it’s pretty accurate that people do indeed eat quite a bit. Have you ever seen a fat homeless person? I have.

And, yes, we’re a country that believes in air conditioning. We have millions of people in this country that insist on running their air conditioners non-stop while wasting tons of wattage hours on 60 watt incandescent light bulbs when 15 watt fluorescents would do just fine. Do you remember the last time you bought a light-bulb? Did you buy a normal one? Or did you even consider a fluorescent bulb?

This is exactly the kind of mentality that Obama was talking about. Wasting energy isn’t doing a damn thing for gas prices. If you look at it from this perspective you can see how other countries might not look favorably on the United States when it comes to energy conservation. We’re a country of gluttonous waste. It’s about time we change that.

I’m not saying that we should tell people what to do…but I do think that people who want to abuse the energy use in this country should pay a premium.

Want to drive that Hummer? Then, yes, maybe you should pay $10 a gallon. Mark it up with a 100% tax. If you can afford it then damn skippy. Otherwise, shut up and drive something more sensible.

Wanna be fat? Wanna smoke? Then be prepared to pay more for health insurance. I quit smoking and I’m also going on a diet. I’m trying to prevent disease…not treat it. Why can’t you?

Wanna turn up that air conditioning and use 60 watt light bulbs? Then be prepared for some regulation on energy use. Use more and you’ll be taxed more.

This isn’t socialism folks…it’s just common sense. If you abuse and neglect the very things you take for granted then the cost will go up. The gas and economy situation in this country is serious and there’s no time for bullshit anymore.

You can joke about what Obama says all you want, but if you ask me he’s only telling you what you need to hear. I think the reason why people find this to be so offensive is that they simply don’t want to admit to themselves that it’s true. So the next time you hear about someone joking about comments like these, take a look at what kind of car they drive. It might surprise you.

The other day I got an e-mail from a friend that said that I should “stop drinking the cool aid” and realize the global warming is a myth…that the proponents of global warming only want our money. My response? Sigh…ok…watch this George Carlin video and you’ll clearly understand how I feel:

In a nutshell, I think both extremist views on global warming (believe it and don’t believe it) are just as wrong with every bad statement they make. If you 100% believe that global warming is a crisis then the worst thing you can do is pass off anything that isn’t 100% conclusive as fact. That is just stupid and irresponsible. Don’t label shit as fact if you can’t back it up.

On the other hand, there is enough evidence out there to suggest that global warming is a problem and that we need to investigate it further to see if it is indeed a crisis. I think it would be far more irresponsible to simply label it as a myth and a hoax and just keep on doing what we’ve been doing.

Who’s drinking the cool aid? Pretending it’s a myth and believing that the majority of people who are drumming up controversy on global warming have some sort of extended agenda is exactly what the oil companies and rich assholes of this world want you to think and do. I can’t deny that there are some rich assholes and politicians who are using the whole global warming thing as a way to make a shitload of money….but you gotta admit that the alternative sucks even worse.

So what would you rather have? World leaders who want to push an agenda that involves taking a serious look at global warming and determining whether to take serious action? Or world leaders who just want to continue waging war with other sovereign countries over oil with fear tactics and other bullshit measures? It’s like “Cake or death?” Umm…cake please!

With the recent British judge ruling, yes, I agree that teachers need to be careful and point out to their students the parts of “An Inconvenient Truth” that are either inaccurate or not 100% conclusive. I think a good portion of what Gore talks about are worst case scenarios…in other words, shit that could happen if oil production continues to rise and no one does a damn thing. Is it 100% accurate? Probably not…but he achieved what he set out to do and that is to raise awareness and get people talking.

But talk is cheap. And I’m tired of people talking, bitching, moaning, and whining. Actions speak louder than words. Keep spending a ton of money on gas guzzling Hummers, pick-up trucks, and BMF SUV’s. Keep using 100-watt lightbulbs in every room. Crank up the A/C and the heat and drive your electricity bill way up. Just keep on using up all those wonderful resources you take for granted and let’s see where it takes us in the next 50 years.

Personally, I don’t give a shit about any of it. I drive a more fuel efficient car and I’m interested in hybrids and cleaner burning diesel engines simply because I’d rather see a day when I can drive downtown without seeing so much fucking smog polluting the air! I’ve decided to use fluorescent bulbs that use only a 10th of the power or less of a normal bulb simply because in doing so I can significantly reduce the amount of my electricity bill. I don’t know about you…but a 16 watt bulb that produces the same amount of light as a 60 watt bulb and with less heat is a real winner to me!

Point is that I think a lot of the folks who complain about the kinds of conservation that I’m talking about are the same kind of people who claim that global warming is a myth. Kind of reminds me of the people who think the holocaust never happened. Yes, there are people who believe that was a hoax! Can you believe that? Think you can prove to those people that, yes, the Nazi did kill a shitload a Jews in gas chambers? Energy conservation is kind of the same thing. Whether you believe in global warming or not, you can’t deny that we need to start thinking about ways to cut down on energy consumption and pollution. It’s just as undeniable as the holocaust.