Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
…especially, Americans. Why, exactly, does Misha say…
So there you have it, Donk voters. You’re personally responsible for every single price hike that the rest of us are seeing at the pumps. PERSONALLY responsible. Are you beginning to see why the rest of us don’t like you very much?
Fuck you very much, you mush-brained, sub-retarded snotwits.
Thatisall.
What inspires such an explosion of scoldings, reprimands and expletives?
For several decades, the Democratic Party has pursued policies designed to drive up the cost of petroleum, and therefore gas at the pump. Remarkably, the Democrats don’t seem to have taken much of a political hit from the current spike in gas prices. Probably that’s because most people don’t realize how different the two parties’ energy policies have been.
Congressman Roy Blunt put together these data to highlight the differences between House Republicans and House Democrats on energy policy:
ANWR Exploration House Republicans: 91% Supported House Democrats: 86% Opposed
Coal-to-Liquid
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% OpposedOil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% OpposedOuter Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% OpposedRefinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% OpposedSUMMARY
91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas.
86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.
Hmmm. I begin to see a pattern here.
What was it I had to say about this a few months ago?
The liberal has a proposal. He looks around and sees that we are living in an antagonistic relationship with each other; his proposed idea would put us into a symbiotic one. You spew carbon and are therefore killing the planet. You are keeping the money you make and are denying it to “needed social programs.” You aren’t paying enough tax on your income; your purchases; your gasoline; your tolls. You are killing the Iraqis. You are poisoning the caribou. The oil companies, in turn, are poisoning you. And if you have a gun, it’s just a matter of time before you shoot me with it.
The conservatives are putting out the message that we are already living in a symbiotic relationship. I breathe out and I spew my carbon, it’s a wonderful thing because the trees and plants need the carbon for photosynthesis. Notice that science, on this point, sides with the conservatives. The oil companies supply the gasoline I need to get to work, earn my money and live my life. Hard facts and evidence, here again, side with the conservatives. Furthermore, if the taxes are raised we’re just going to buy less stuff…and if the taxes are raised on the oil companies, they’ll just pass that on to the consumer. Once again: Economic science and historical evidence side with the conservatives.
The liberal says, enact my proposal and we’ll enter into a symbiotic relationship. Next week, the liberal will have another proposal, and offer the same pitch — he won’t admit the last proposal failed to get us into this symbiotic relationship. He won’t offer to roll back this previous failed proposal. To our discredit, nobody will call on him to do so…
The conservative says we’re already in the symbiotic relationship. You are good for me. I am good for you. We can all go on doing exactly what we’re doing. The only thing we should really change is to get those damn liberals to stop voting.
Now, I don’t mean to imply by this that democrats hate themselves, or are lazy thinkers.
But…as far as the self-hating goes, they are human. Or they’re supposed to be, anyhow. And reading over Congressman Blount’s statistics, you just can’t ignore this nearly-constant permeation of anti-human politicking.
And it does strike me as lazy thinking, or sub-standard thinking one way or t’other, to presume anything we might do to help our domestic petroleum markets — like, fr’instance, having one?? — just automatically is intolerably harmful to the caribou, the elk, the polar bears, the spotted owl, the snail darter, the crapgobbler shrimp, the this the that the other damn thing.
Little or no investigation as to whether this is so. There are pipelines up there…caribou were supposed to be dying out…they’re doing fine. Where’s the curiosity. There is none, it’s just everlastingly presumed that when we lay a section of pipe down we’re going to flatten an entire family of caribou and poison several others. And if we do cause some armageddon in the middle of the crapgobbler shrimp population, what of it? Where’s the debate about costs & benefits? Humans are part of the ecosystem too. How come we leapfrog over that pro-and-con exchange and jump directly to the “oh well it’s settled then, you can’t do that”?
Because you know, I don’t see the killer whales doing that when it’s time to chow down on an adorable otter. The Orca has to do what it’s gonna do…we need to do what we’re gonna do.
Does a willingness within our species to sacrifice ourselves, make us more civilized? That’s Question A. Question B is, okay now that we’ve done it, and we’ve decided things the democrat anti-human way for the better part of a century now…where’s our congratulations and kudos? Orcas are chowing down through adorable otters like the damn things are glazed donut holes. We, on the other hand, are oh so nobly buying our petroleum from Osama bin Laden so we don’t harm one hair on the hide of the poor caribou. Where’s the dedicated environmentalist rushing out to shake the hand of the civilized human race for being so ready to sacrifice itself to keep the environment so pristine, for being so much better than that vicious killer whale?
It’s not gonna happen. Because the environmental movement is all about being anti-human. It really doesn’t have anything to do with preserving the environment; flora, fauna, or anything else.
And the democrats are all about supporting the environmentalists. Maybe they don’t like humans because they want to please the environmentalists…or maybe they like the environmentalists because they share the anti-human goal. But a “pro-environment” movement would have some curiosity here & there. An anti-human movement, would not. And the one that burdens us every day, is remarkably incurious.
You’ll have to ask others how & why we tolerate it for so long. Don’t ask me.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Bros before HOES-
Hillary sucks but Monaca sucks better!
- McCaylen | 06/17/2008 @ 12:25