by AgentR » Sun 12 Nov 2006, 23:37:00
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'T')he question is, What accounts for this disparity? Don't you think that question is worth investigating?
Thats pretty easy actually. A sizeable chunk of liberals think that they can use the concept of Peak Oil to move policy agenda items. Things like urban renewal, light rail, more efficient cars, lower greenhouse emissions, mass transit, opposition to large scale automobile priority projects, etc (I could go on for a very long time.).
My opinion is that these folks don't really quite believe that Peak Oil will do what is advertised as far as crash-n-burn, but that the scare factor is seen as useful.
This neither requires nor excludes intelligence.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut many of us maintain, with considerable evidence on our side, that these conservative, pro-business, pro-growth, pro-war policies have been irrational and
stupid and that their failure is becoming manifest and may even be fatal.
It wouldn't really make any difference had the folks been liberals in charge at this moment. In the end, the US has to choose between a 10mbpd future, and a 20+mbpd future with Resource Wars. There aren't a handful of Democrats in office that would ever vote to create a 10mbpd future. Just ask yourself, earlier in Bush's term when we had achieved a slightly negative growth rate, were the liberals chearing, or were they using that as an indication of failure. Liberals in the US are fully committed to eternal growth.
Now, I'm not saying that the current set of Resource Wars aren't the responsibility of the conservatives, we get credit for both the bad and the good in that regard.