I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Well, that's not much of a surprise. You knew it was coming one way or another.
So much to pollute, so little time.
First give me a tax cut!
An overpopulation of exactly one POTUS.
Conservatives will tell you there's not ENOUGH people in america- so everyone should breed, breed, breed-
Of course they mean not enough white folks.
Drilling ANWR is an overpopulation problem? Thanks for that insight, Mr. Ehrlich.
Caribou...isn't that the name of an SUV?
Grrr. I am so sick of this bullshit. Its getting harder and harder to care.
I live in a very Blue state. I wish I had a godamn nickel for every Kerry/Edwards sticker I saw on an SUV.
Overpopulation? I don't understand. The amount of oil under the Arctic Wildlife Refuge is miniscule compared to the reserves in other parts of the world. So even if you blame oil consumption on overpopulation that doesn't connect to drilling the Refuge.
Or have I misunderstood?
Not so much overpopulation as bad land use. Sprawling suburbs are much more to blame. Other countries have higher per population vis a vis land mass, and they do a better job of protecting natural areas.
It's the market and aversion to planning run amock. Let's not revert to Malthusian (right-wing) arguments here ...
LOL re: Ehrlich. Yeah I thought the neo-Malthusians were dead. Here they come again ...
So instead of complaining about it, why aren't we offering an alternative plan?
Increasing the CAFE standards 3 mpg by 2010 would easily save much more oil than ANWR could ever hope to produce, and would not hurt economically because the technology to do it already exists.
This will pass, and I am sure there will be more than one Dem willing to sign-on for Chimpy's Big Alaskan Adventure.
Then they can all critisize it in 2008 in several fundraising emails.
Ahh, I suggest massive amounts of birth control to remedy the problem.
And free abortions for all!!!!
You could have 100 billion people on Earth, but if you didn't have cars, and we used available alternatives for industrial lubricants and petroleum-based plastics, there wouldn't be much in way of an oil shortage.
The sad part is that where they intend to drill is not really that "oil rich" as the article states. Sure it has oil, but it won't really do much for us.
It is true that some potentially oil rich areas where drilling has occurred in Alaska have been all but abandoned due to the lack of oil and expense of extracting it.
The dire straits of nature are to do with two things: 1. the number of people on this earth and 2. the amount each of them consumes. The second is increasing in importance all the time, what with the Chinese buying SUVs, but we are still the biggest consumers of all. Still, it's true that if we had fewer people on earth they could all have SUVs and there would still be places of wilderness for the other animals.
Revenge of the Convention Kicker...
.
Dems will never get it. Repubs know that there is not that much energy there. But they need an issue for '06, if gas prices are still high. Dems should not stand in the way. Alaskans want it. How many people here have visited Anwar? How many plan to?
OK, control population growth. Go ahead.
[eternity passes]
So George is going to look for oil in ANWR huh? Well, he was so good at finding it during his wild-catting days that I'm sure he will solve all our oil dependency problems right away.
People need to realize that overpopulation is the root of all our environmental problems. Too many people using too many resources that nature can't replenish at the current rate of use are a formula for extiction.
War anyone?
forgot the "OT"
me bad
resume thread
Stop with the overpopulation crappola.
What we have here is whole lot of people eating whole lot of giant ungulates(cattle, ok?). Our grain production goes to feeding these hugely expensive creatures.
To make a long story short, fertilizer production, alone, requires a lot of oil.
It's the cattle, stupid!
We're scary. We really are.
-
On the other hand, Orwell is alive and well when it comes to global warming
"Such a change would threaten coastal cities, change growing patterns for vegetation and destroy habitats for some wildlife, but an energy-starved world would have new areas for oil and gas exploration, according to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report."
Everything seems to piss y'all off. You react by documenting and cataloging your disgust. The result is a curious amassing of petty, unrelated beefs with the world. Its purpose is not really to evaluate the hated conservative culture that surrounds us. You aim instead to infuriate us with dozens, hundreds, thousands of stories of the many tiny ways the world around us assaults progressive values. You offer no resolution, simply reminding us that we can never win.
Thanks.
And hell, here I thought ANWAR was uninhabited.
Hell, someone had to say it.
And it's not the cows, it's the corn. Seriously, we do weird shit to our food.
overpopulation ?
um, how many SUV's were sold in the US last year that get 11 MPG ?
try "over-i don't give a shit what impact my personal consumption habits have on the world as a whole-ulation".
I hate to be off topic so early but...
It seems to me the left is behind the curve yet again.The left wants to come out swinging and "hit em harder".The right is already telling middle America that the left is hateful and out of touch with reality.We here know this just isnt true,but come a few more months/years of this doublespeak comming out of the radio,its going to be the conventional wisdom among the average joe ,as the left will continue to throw out the "hit em harder" theme.Look and listen to them blather on about how we hate them,dont listen to the lies,listen to the message they are spreading.Its got a theme that is unmistakeable,and yet we want to create a theme that is consistent with their rhetoric.
Somehow we are going to have to get ahead of the curve,and its becomming apparent that we are WAY behind.
Digby has a great post on this topic,yet his posters are saying exactly what I am seeing here.THe message our online community seems to want to hear plays right into the rights gamebook.
We are losing badly and we will lose even worse if we dont turn it around and right fucking now.
smalfish | Email | Homepage | 11.10.04 - 5:39 pm | #
EXCELLENT POST. Now prepare to be called a troll, etc.
Overpop ain't the problem. It's the rate of consumption per human. US birthrates are pretty stable. What's not stable is our exponential growth in "needs" (cars, houses, land, useless crap), especially among rich folk.
Our country could cut oil use by 50% in five years if we put our mind to it. Our leaders, alas, have other priorities.
Off topic but:
"Any idea who was slaughtered in those slaughterhouses."
--Wolf Blitzer on CNN just now.
Since most all the slaughterers have left Fallujah...oh yeah, like Zarquawi's gonne be there, watch for this to be the justification of the whole raid.
Slaughter...It's what slaughterer's have for breakfast, after their rape rooms.
Hate to be such a nitpickler, but I gotta point out: It may be pronounced "Anwar" but spelled "ANWR."
Sadat died some time ago.
Sorry. Part of my job to be anal about things like this.
This is such a figment of the elite-left. There is more wilderness now than there was 100 years ago. We now have acres and acres of multi-level "Freedom Trees" all through out America. It is people like you though, that don't care when the freedom-haters bring down our two biggest Freedom Trees. An you call yourselves enironmentalists.
Your kind will never understand America. Denounce bad people now.
Political Physics
Gee, if overpopulation is the problem, why don't the denizens of this nuthouse SOLVE that problem for us?? Don't y'all believe in the right to physician-assisted suicide? Why don't you all just shuffle off this mortal coil? You'll actually be DOING something to "save the environment" (instead of just boring the rest of us to death preaching about it), AND you'd be improving the human gene pool at the same time! Two birds with one stone!
And for sure, no one would miss you.
Smalfish: I agree and disagree. There's nothing wrong with being agressive. But we have to do it the way the Christian Coalition does it: with a smile.
There's no contradiction between a "take no prisoners" strategy, and learning how to be diplomatic and effective in presenting our message.
It's call strategery!
I think we all should put ourselves in Self Storage for two weeks per month. Think of how many resources we'd save!
You could have 100 billion people on Earth, but if you didn't have cars, and we used available alternatives for industrial lubricants and petroleum-based plastics, there wouldn't be much in way of an oil shortage.
OTOH the land requirements of the usual bio-alternatives might result in an arable land shortage, particularly if in addition to having lubricants and plastics, those 100 billion people still wanted to eat.
Solution in two words:
Cellulosic ethanol
-
Lets face it,ANWR is a dead fight.The oil companies have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost.
Can we coin another acronym, as at Corrente?
How about this: YANS!
Yet.
Another.
November.
Surprise.
Bush sure didn't campaign on this a whole lot, did he?
Likewise, they sure didn't campaign a lot on privatizing Social Security or attacking Fallujah.
We must destroy the world in order to save it.
EXCELLENT POST. Now prepare to be called a troll, etc.
Umm, no. Unless someone other than smalfish is posting as smalfish, then no one is going to call him/her a troll as he/she posts here all the time and is in no way being disruptive.
I believe the post should have been titled "Destroying the Environment Should Not Be an American Value."
Unfortunately, at this moment in history, it is very much an American value, accepted and endorsed by a majority of our voters. I'd be willing to bet that they don't realize that's what they have voted for. But I'm not inclined to excuse their ignorance anymore.
"You could have 100 billion people on Earth, but if you didn't have cars, and we used available alternatives for industrial lubricants and petroleum-based plastics, there wouldn't be much in way of an oil shortage."
Anonymous
Thanks, I will file that under "completely useless" Reality is a difficult concept I know, but try to stick with concepts that actually exist.
wtf is the "elite left" anyway ?
is there an an unelite left ? who are they ?
is there a elite right and are they just as evil?
personally i think "elite" is a kneejerk qualifier that people attach to the word "left" for no good reason .
"OTOH the land requirements of the usual bio-alternatives might result in an arable land shortage, particularly if in addition to having lubricants and plastics, those 100 billion people still wanted to eat."
Okay, lower meat consumption by 80-90 percent.
The "100 billion" figure was simply meant to illustrate that the problem isn't population and wasn't meant to be taken as a literal figure.
smalfish,
You probably got something there, as the anger does play into the wingnuts hands, but neither alternative seems to work. Being sheep didn't do for shit this time around, and frankly, most of the evidence seems to show people don't care so much about facts and logic as they do for emotion and platitudes. I forget exactly where I read it - think it was Toxic Sludge Is Good For You or Trust Us, We're Experts - but some sociologists studied some scientists doing research on a potentially dangerous drug. They gave stats, charts, detailed info...and were basically ignored.
You know me, I'm a cat that's flat in love with logic and intellectual discourse - and generally a love-filled dude in the first place - so I won't slinging the shit. I also expect to continue to be ignored by people who think Nader's a saint or God appointed Bush or that we're inches away from being swamped by the Islamofacist horde or that it's "my money, not the gubmint".
People hear what they want to hear, and I don't know how in the world to change that. Personally, I think liberals and progressives would do themselves - and the country - a world of good if they shifted their focus on local politics. Rebuild from the ground up, as it were.
But back to your original point, either way, the GOPranos and the craven media will twist whatever tactic the Democrats use. I don't think it'll work too much longer, though, thankfully. The reality-based world is starting to show its ugly head.
Yeah its economics, not population. Look at how birthrates in industrialized countries have levelled off or declined, and then look at the trends on resource use. It ain't pretty.
Capitalism is a bummer.
Carpbasman
THank you for the respect.
Thanks, I will file that under "completely useless" Reality is a difficult concept I know, but try to stick with concepts that actually exist.
Aw, look at the sadsack trailing me around with his little bruised ego. How cute, yet pathetic.
Sorry. Part of my job to be anal about things like this.
Thanks, grr. I fixed it. 
what flash said. Over consumption: e.g., flagwaver consuming air that could be used by sentient beings.
I'm surprised they waited so long...I figured the machinery for drilling would be idling on the Canadian/Alaska border just waiting for the go order.
But I DO plan to contact my senator, the growing-ever-more-repugnant Pete Domenici, and tell him just what I think of his plan. I encourage other NMexicans who come here to follow my lead.
I posted about this on my blog in slightly more detail yesterday, and I'll post that instead of my full comments and links here:
http://overtreality.blogspot.com...black-
gold.html
grr,
points for pedantry.
smallfish,
You have a point. Democrats as well as bloggers tend to be reactive. To get ahead of the ball we need ideas and leaders. We can be agressive without being biatchy.
Like this one: If the oil companies want oil in ANWR, we the American people should vote on how much to charge them to use OUR property and resources. No more communist no bid contracts. What American could be against that idea?
i wouldn't say it's a matter of overpopulation, but rather one of over-consumption. with thanksgiving rapidly approaching, why not take part in buy nothing day?
rest assured. the environment in heaven is pure and looks just like texas.
I am quickly becoming a convert to George Carlin's point of view, just sit back and watch the circus, because entropy is cool. We are a closed end system and the Earth is going to shake us off like a surface nuisance.
Considering the events of the last week, I no longer fear for the human species, because it won't do any good.
From Ann Coulter (ugh, I hated writing that): "The ethic of conservation is the explicit abnegation of man's dominion over the Earth. The lower species are here for our use. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet -- it's yours. That's our job: drilling, mining and stripping. Sweaters are the anti-Biblical view. Big gas-guzzling cars with phones and CD players and wet bars -- that's the Biblical view." - From column "Oil Good; Democrats bad"
"We are a closed end system"
Man, you're an idiot. You're going to replace Pie at the bottom of the list shortly.
Backslider
I agree,You make a point as to how to proceed that might be the simplest yet most backwards approach.
Let the wingnuts have their turn and show their and while the left cooly sits back and does nothing that could play into the hands of the rabid media crowd,Rush and judy and sean ,ect,ect.
In other words ,doing nothing at this point,other than standing up for basic rights,(like abortion,SS,and deficit reduction)may turn out to be the only thing the right is not prepared for.
THey have the left cornered,and the most obvious thing for us to do is to come out fighting,and this is exactly what the right is prepping the country for.
I say let us stand back and wait it out.Its going to be tough to bide our time,but if we can be patient,the right will collapse in on itself.
nothing will stop them now since adding this policy to a budget bill only needs a simple 51-49 majority with no ability to filibuster.
facists win.
what flash said. Over consumption: e.g., flagwaver consuming air that could be used by sentient beings.
Ain't that the truth.
I invite trolliforms of all types to return to your respective bridges.
You're boring.
Dana wrote: People need to realize that overpopulation is the root of all our environmental problems. Too many people using too many resources that nature can't replenish at the current rate of use are a formula for extiction.
--------------------
So why is our government incentivizing people to have more children by upping the deduction? I don't have kids, though I do like them and am involved in several kids lives. With more people = more resource use, it seems counterintuitive for our govt to incentivize people to have more kids.
In the end it DOES all come down to overpopulation, Malthus was right, he just did not envision the amount of technological fixes in store. In the end overpopulation equals a "behavioral sink" in any population of animals from sea cucumbers to deer. arguments about inefficient consumption, while true in the short term just mask a long term inevitibility if the problem is not addressed. The administration is all about denial, when in deep denial a pattern of overcompensation is not unusual.
for those tired of bandaids:
The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
But I'm not inclined to excuse their ignorance anymore.
always looking for the most salient comment.
fuck the right. we are talking fascism here people. the enviroment is important, but who really cares when george is doing everything he can to drive us to a nuclear nightmare. sure, sure, i know, listen to the shrill little lefty. well people aren't gonna hear it till it's shouted from the rooftops. (read that in the bible) on the other hand fuck 'em, i really sort of don't care if they can't see the evidence so obviously in their face.
A quick article on population, nitrogen, explosives and fertiziler.
Oh, yeah. We do have a population problem.
OT, but if anyone hasn't seen this, you should. Triumph The Insult Comic Dog goes to the debates and takes on the spinmeisters. Too many good shots to list, but the best may be him telling Karl "Bush's Brain" Rove he expected a "much smaller man".
Anonymous:
Coming from you, I am truly hurt by the idiot comment, because I respect your opinion so much, I mean everyone here is so happy that you join the discussion so intelligently. Your intelligence is matched only by you stinging wit and grasp of the issues. Gosh, I hope you keep coming back and adding your refreshing point of view to the discussions on these threads.
Real problems in Florida - but no one cares (from blogforamerica.com):
• In Baker County, 69% of voters are registered Democrats... yet Bush won 7,738 votes to Kerry's 2,180.
• In Holmes County, in the panhandle, there are seven Democrats for every two Republicans in the district. Bush beat Kerry, 6,410 to 1,810.
• In Dixie County, 77.5 percent of voters registered as Democrats, yet Bush received 4,433 votes to Kerry's 1,959.
• Lafayette County, 83 percent Democratic, went for Bush, 2,460 to 845.
• In Liberty County, Bristol, Florida, 88 percent of registered voters are Democrats; 8 percent Republican. Bush beat Kerry, 1,927 to 1,070.
Can't blame me for overpopulation: born ugly with a nasty disposition.
Consider this:
The total consumption we cause is simply
average consumption per person
TIMES
the number of people.
We could reduce total consumption (which causes the demand for more oil and destroys nature by our demands for more roads and houses) by either reducing the average consumption per person or the total number of people or both. I don't see the world on the whole approving of keeping consumption levels down for the majority, and that leaves controlling population size as the main tool. At least until we invent better technologies.
...it's really a problem of overpopulation.
Too many rats in the cage.
...it's really a problem of overpopulation.
Too many rats in the cage.
Hecate, bo: Thanks. It's a curse.
re: Spectre's point about population on the decline. They don't have it online, but the 11/9 issue of Wired has some interesting info (and flashy graphs!) about this.
Birthrates are still decreasing around the globe, from India to Italy...the world's population may top out at 9 billion people in 100 years, then start to drop. The masses aren't getting any younger, either. By 2050, the number of people older than 70 in Russia, Italy, Germany and Japan will nearly double, and there won't be enough taxpayers to pay for exploding retirement and medical programs. In the developing world, aging will happen even faster.
There is more wilderness now than there was 100 years ago.
...not where I grew up. There's a concrete drainage ditch where I used to catch catfish and frogs. The trees are gone and there's an RV parking lot there.
Scott
I care,and I care tremendously.
I am waiting for the indictments and untill some more news comes out I cant allow myself the outrage anymore.
Please,if you have any new information,pease do share,otherwise the waiting continues.
Not that anything will ever come of this fiasco.Our democracy is in the balance and the analysis continues.
Will there be any conclusions?
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost.
It seems that, lately, someone has said this in a post every time a new challenge appears.
Quite interesting, really.
OT - Election's over, John Ashcroft's work is done, nothing to see here.
Terror Alert Lowered to Yellow
The federal government will lower the terror alert status for financial institutions in New York, New Jersey and Washington, The Associated Press learned Wednesday.
The reduction from orange to yellow, the midpoint on the government's five-level terror warning system, comes three months after the alert was raised amid concerns the institutions could be al-Qaida targets. Yellow is "elevated," while orange is considered a "high" threat of attack.
Lets face it,ANWR is a dead fight.The oil companies have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost.
"Lets face it,[abortion] is a dead fight.The [misogynists] have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost."
----------
"Lets face it,[equal rights] is a dead fight.The [bigots and hatemongers] have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost."
----------
"Lets face it,[fair elections] is a dead fight.The [most corrupt criminals in the history of American government] have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost."
-----------
"Lets face it,[health care] is a dead fight.The [pharmaceutical companies and HMOs] have control of our government and half the population voted for them.
Lets find another battle to fight as this one is lost."
------------
And on, and on...
Anyonymous is a coward.
grrr,
Basically, you made the point I had. From all I've read - and I'm certainly no expert on the subject - population growth is looking like it's gonna level out soon, and the real problem is mismanagement of resources. And, of course, in the grand scheme of things, overpopulation really isn't a problem, because Mother Nature has a way of thinning the herd from time to time. We sometimes forget we're little more than monkeys with digital watches, and despite that, we're awfully good at thinning the herd from within.
the enviroment is important
The rest of the world certainly agrees.
God, we're the black sheep of the planet. How mortifying.
george, you asshole.
Pie wrote:
It seems that, lately, someone has said this in a post every time a new challenge appears.
Quite interesting, really."
Yeah, I have noticed it too, it usually goes "We will loose if you waste your energies on this, we must move on to the next battle"
Move along, nuttin to see here, LOOK at new juror with a cute name!
It seems that, lately, someone has said this in a post every time a new challenge appears.
It seems to me,that the right is hell bent on doing what they want.If we are to complain about every single fight,we will have diminished our ability to garner support for those issues that really matter.ANWAR has been fought for quite awhile now and its significance to our cause is small.
Lets save our capitol for the fights that are comming,such as, abortion and creationism.As our capitol is quite limited right now.To fight issues that we will not win,we lose.
Hey, fellow Minnesotans. Let's not forget our illustrious Republican senator's campaign promise that he would vote against ANWR drilling. He campaigned on that being a sign that his vote wouldn't be a rubber stamp for Bush. E-mail or write to remind him, and when he inevitably reneges work to defeat him in 2008.
If we are going to "pick battles" does anyone see one more important that election error/fraud?
That one seems to be the primary problem, and until it is addressed nothing else matters. Without this you don't really have a democracy.
I guess whether you believe that torture or pillage is an American value depends on what side of our history you find yourself.
I am beginning to wonder if George W. Bush is the reincarnation of James K. Polk. But somewhere in the process of reincarnating, Mr. Polk realized he shouldn't be so dour - so he picked up that stupid, frat boy smirk when he came back as George W. Bush.
Bullshit hey we already have the label as lefty environmentalists, so if we don't fight them on this, then we have the label as wimpy lefty environmentalists. George Bush can kiss my ass from now on, and if the dems don't grow some sac and start standing up to these assholes, they are going to lose a hell of a lot more than an election.
Fuck them, they want us to think we are defeated, if you believe their rhetoric then you are defeated. Fight them tooth and nail on every issue, every appointment, every seat.
What the hell, it's not like we have any political capital to lose anyway.
jay boilswater
Exactly!
Solution in two words:
Cellulosic ethanol.
Yeah, it's cool. No grains needed, just garbage. The problem is ethanol still produces CO2, I believe. But, it's a good start that can be distributed through gas stations and will work in most cars.
"Lets save our capitol for the fights that are comming,such as, abortion and creationism.As our capitol is quite limited right now.To fight issues that we will not win,we lose."
-smallfish
Do you decide what battles we fight? I find environmental trashing more important than abortion or creationism as an issue. Who decides?
backslider,
Yep. The problem is profiteering passing itself off as stewardship.
Ahem... that was weird.
The previous "Smallfish" was me.
ANWR is a symbol
Whether or not there's much oil underneath is actually irrelevant.
For the enviro's (I am one) it represents one of the few last remaining (more or less) pristance places in the US that deserves to be saved just for its own sake.
For the anti-enviro's it's a symbol of what they want and haven't been able to get.
Now Bush thinks he has the power to get it.
This is a sign to his supporters that he will try to get them what they want.
If Kerry is smart, he will use THIS as an issue to stand on. He has always been a strong supporter of ANWR. If he plays his cards right, it can be a wedge issue FOR US.
If we are to complain about every single fight,we will have diminished our ability to garner support for those issues that really matter.
No, smalfish. All these issues matter. All of them.
I have enough energy to fight for all of them. The alternative scenario gives me strength.
Knight Ridder compiled 14 pollution-oriented indicators from government and university statistics. Nine of the 14 indicators showed a worsening trend, two showed improvements and three others zigzagged.
Statistics that have worsened:
Superfund cleanups of toxic waste fell by 52 percent.
Fish-consumption warnings for rivers doubled.
Fish-consumption advisories for lakes increased 39 percent.
The number of beach closings rose 26 percent.
Civil citations issued to polluters fell 57 percent.
Criminal pollution prosecutions dropped 17 percent.
Asthma attacks increased by 6 percent.
There were small increases in global temperatures and unhealthy air days.
By the way, Dems aren't the only ones against drilling ANWR, many moderate Republicans are too. If you are going to pick your battles, pick ones you can actually win. With moderate Republicans, the Dems can still win this one.
"Such a change would threaten coastal cities, change growing patterns for vegetation and destroy habitats for some wildlife, but an energy-starved world would have new areas for oil and gas exploration, according to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report."
Attaturk - saw the live presentation of the ACIA on CSPAN2 the other day. The report is actually very pro-environment and uses "good science."
This "yay for commerce" section was a very small piece of the report and obviously stuck in there because someone in our environmental sciences bureaucracy didn't want to lose their job.
About 90% of the panel's presentation stressed the ghastly effects of global warming, etc. on the Artic region. And then came time for questions from the SCLM representatives.
The second or third guy stood up and basically accused them of not being "fair and balanced" in their coverage and cited this passage, asking why they didn't emphasize it more. To his credit, the chairman said they were concerned with science, not political applications.
As the panel spent close to 50% of the remaining time responding to questions in a similiar vein, I started to smell AEI all over the place.
Sure enough, all the mainstream coverage I've seen of the ACIA release to this point has balanced this one small portion of the report with the rest of it.
-
The news coming out of Florida is very hinky about the votes in dem counties going overwhelmingly to Bush, that has got to be followed-up on, can anyone say impeachable offense?
Dems will never get it. Repubs know that there is not that much energy there. But they need an issue for '06, if gas prices are still high. Dems should not stand in the way. Alaskans want it. How many people here have visited Anwar? How many plan to?
You hit the nail right on the freaking head! The last time ANWR was voted on inthe Senate 8 Republicans voted no. If they ever win on this issue they won't be able to beat us over the head with it any longer. That's why it won't really ever happen.
Yes, 85% of the people here in Alaska want ANWR opened but it has nothing to do with energy - it's about jobs. We Democrats already managed to kill off the timber industry here. The fishing industry is killing itself off by over harvesting. Oil and government are the only two thriving industries left and there would be no money for government without the oil. You can't blame people here for wanting jobs.
hecate, did you hear about the new Halliburton scandal?
possibly worth a post.
see url for full article
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. ambassador to Kuwait and other senior U.S. officials put pressure on Halliburton to award a contract to a Kuwaiti company suspected of overcharging to bring fuel into Iraq according to State Department documents released on Wednesday.
The documents, portions of which were released by Democratic U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman also said the State Department received information in the summer of 2003 that Halliburton officials demanded kickbacks and solicited bribes from Altanmia Commercial Marketing Company of Kuwait...
oh and by the way, this:
" easing rules for oil and gas drilling on federal land in the Rocky Mountains "
BushCo may be surprised when he discovers that many of the highly conservative R ranchers who live along the Rocky Mt front in Montana OPPOSE this drilling, because of the way it impacts their own livelihood and their own ranches (the Feds own the mineral rights and can drill on private land). These conservatives just elected a D Governor...
It's just greed pure and simple. It's the number one quality of American culture.
You're going to replace Pie at the bottom of the list shortly.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.10.04 - 5:57 pm |
No, your deathgrip on that bottom rung appears to remain firm.
Oil and government are the only two thriving industries left and there would be no money for government without the oil. You can't blame people here for wanting jobs.
Rape every last bit of your resources. Or look for new ways to prosper.
Your choice.
Are we going to hear anything from any prominent Democratic politician about this? Or about Gonzales? Or about SS Privatization? Or have they all gone home to lick their wounds?
I saw Chuck Shumer on the Daily Show the other night and the best he could muster was: "We're going to have to do a lot of thinking." Fuck that. How about acting? How about publically opposing Bushit policies, and giving good reasons for doing so? Or are they waiting for someone to come up with a "strategery" for not pissing off the racists and homophobes who gave Bush his 3% victory before they even attempt to present any opposition??
krsaz -
Here is the post-recount 2000 tally for Florida. Very similar results.
OT: Dammit, I go to work, things get busy, and I miss a world-class, definitive post from Atrios plus a whole day of HECATE having the keys to the Eschaton???
There is no god. (Whoops, no, let's not talk about that, for God's sa... um, nevermind.)
this is a winner and the dems of teh 108th congress should make a final forceful stand...repubs assaulting the wildreness is part of the "big-money" narrative for the future...this is good news.
ANWAR [sic] has been fought for quite awhile now and its significance to our cause is small.
Whattaya mean "our," paleface?
Hey - this is totally OT, but it is wonderful.
I just went to a meeting of Citizens for Equality/ElectionProtection04. Guess how much Bush won Dallas County by -
Are you ready?
1%. One point. Dallas County, Texas.
1 point.
We're going Democrat in Texas. We really are.
To make cellulose, plants absorb CO2. I'd guess the growing and combusting of biomass is a wash with respect to CO2. It's basically a form of solar energy.
The issue isn't whether there's a technological fix. There is, or will be. The issues are who will benefit, who will get hurt, how we and our children will have to live as we pay for our dearth of foresight and surfeit of greed.
Oil and government are the only two thriving industries left and there would be no money for government without the oil. You can't blame people here for wanting jobs.
BTW. What are you going to do when the oil's gone?
No, your deathgrip on that bottom rung appears to remain firm.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 11.10.04 - 6:40 pm | #
Hey, you didn't happen to post as MikeSC over at Pandagon, didya?
BTW. What are you going to do when the oil's gone?
pie-James Watt expects the rapture before that happens. Don't worry. God has us covered.
Bring on the crapture!
Somebody better get USGS and DOE on the same page.
DOE says the US uses 20.4 Million barrels per day.
USGS says that ANWR has a total of 10.4 Billion barrels of oil, or about 510 days of oil at current consumption levels--Not much to show for a projected decade of drilling.
Too many people for the planet to support. One child policy. Legislate mandatory abortions....
Fundie heads all over America simultaneously explode.
Bring on Global Climate CHange!
ITs the only way to fix the shit we're in.
Time to register with the sierraclub.org or nrdc.org
It's an American value now, Sweetie.
Yo - Backslider, you still hangin'?
1%. One point. Dallas County, Texas.
That's because the whites have moved to the north, to towns in Collin county like Plano and Allen.
ahhhh, but that's what the election was all about: destroying the environment IS an American value.
-
We Democrats(sic) already managed to kill off the timber industry here. The fishing industry is killing itself off by over harvesting.
so you blame the democrats for "killing" off an industry by not allowing greed-heads to over harvest,
and yet you ackowledge that greedy over-harvesting is killing off the fishing industry?
which is it? killing off by
over -harvesting? or killing off through over regulation?
I'd rather have the fish and no jobs, than no fish and no jobs, since you can still eat the fish.
Yo - Backslider, you still hangin'?
Billy B | Email | Homepage | 11.10.04 - 7:07 pm | #
Tryin' like hell. What's the deal, daddy-o?
here's an idea - call their bluff. We don't have the votes to stop them from opening up ANWR, so why don't we offer a deal - support for ANWR in exchange for a 5-7 mpg hike in fuel efficency over the next five years? That way, when the oil lobby gets its way, they take the hit for not compromising.
here's an idea - call their bluff. We don't have the votes to stop them from opening up ANWR, so why don't we offer a deal - support for ANWR in exchange for a 5-7 mpg hike in fuel efficency over the next five years? That way, when the oil lobby gets its way, they take the hit for not compromising.
I have to believe that at this point in the game the idea of conservatives pushing to drill in ANWR is more an act of spite aimed at democrats, liberals, and environmentalists rather than necessity.
There just isn't any logic in the slightest for why we should be there other than for conservatives in Alaska hoping to drain what little money they can out of the place.
MYOB'
.
Ok, I'm entering this one late as usual. But. The ANWR issue is what I call a "halo issue" or a symbolic fight for a certain value. It means more than the sum of its parts. It is one of the only literally untouched areas left even in Alaska, and it is a key migratory route and calving ground for caribou etc. So why does fighting for it matter?
ANWR would provide only enough oil to fuel the US alone for 6 months by oil industry estimates. And don't think that oil would be all available at once and come online onto the national strategic reserve. it would be sold as it comes out, just like every other oil production. It would basically be a waste of the effort. The results are not enough to justify the loss of a true wilderness.
ANWR should have been a dead issue by now- Bush thought he had the votes to open it twice already. But it gets major attention and letter-writing/representative-calling efforts from even "occasional" environmentalists, and yes even moderate Repubs have voted against its opening. So it has remained as it should, a world heritage site that we can leave in its original state for future generations of all life.
Environmentalism is my personal A1 hotbutton issue. The left has largely abandoned it in the face of the current insanity on every front. But ANWR is one fight I will feel personally ashamed of if I have to tell my daughter it was opened. We can keep it open. It is unneeded oil industry expansion.
There has been a lot of talk of overpopulation in this thread. Sure, but that's not something we can solve without global efforts that have no support. The real issue we can do something about is that America consumes the most energy per capita of any country in the world by a staggering amount. Europe and Asia are aware of the importance of energy conservation and have been accelerating it as policy for years.
Additionally oil is priced a lot closer to its actual societal cost in Eurasia. So you don't see 14-mpg Dodge Durangos in every driveway.
It's not that every person on Earth consumes x-amount of energy. It's that every American consumes 4-5 times x amount of energy. That is also linked to our beef diet, yes. We are more dependent on foreign oil than we ever have been, climate change is accepted scientific fact, oil is more and more a strategic resource tying us to the Middle East, and rather than doing *anything* to reduce demand, here we are trying to drill for a tiny, costly amount of oil that really is a waste of time- unless you stand to profit from it.
Arrghh.
here's an idea - call their bluff. We don't have the votes to stop them from opening up ANWR, so why don't we offer a deal - support for ANWR in exchange for a 5-7 mpg hike in fuel efficency over the next five years? That way, when the oil lobby gets its way, they take the hit for not compromising.
wanker | Email | Homepage | 11.10.04 - 7:39 pm | #
You're assuming democrats have any leverage other than the filibuster.
These people don't believe in cooperation. The more democrats obstruct the more they have towards the next election. They will do what they want and totally ignore the democrats.
This is why we must filibuster to their asses fall off. Make Mr. Smith proud!
MYOB'
.
i'm saying that it's a way to try to get something out of nothing. the votes are likely there this time to open it, so we can fight like hell and lose and get nothing, or fight like hell by offering them a deal they'll never take, and then use their opposition to increased mpg standards to make them seem totally unreasonable because they're the ones that refused to compromise.
It's also a complete forsaking of thrift, which once upon a time was considered to be one of the most important American values of all!
Wanker, MYOB, you both have good approaches. A filibuster is called for, and I think there is always enough outcry for ANWR for the Dems to justify it. ANWR likely will be attached to another piece-o-crap energy bill that the GOP will call the "Smart Energy" bill or some other Orwellian ruse. Offering the increased-MPG option might work, if they had any intention of honoring such a compromise. But higher-MPG has been killed multiple times so I wouldn't hold much hope. It is a way we could say, "Hey, they voted a reasonable option down." Reason isn't going far these days though.
But, ANWR will be stalled at the judicial level. Until the GOP does away with "activist judges" that actually interpret law as it's written, it will stop at the courts. Again and again.
great cthulhu, absolutely, that's always been the best argument about that crap, its not even going to "pay" for the process of getting the equipment up there practically. It's a great example of pro-rethug framing because we always hear this crap about how the argument against is not that but some bullshit about moose. We propose:
1-Bitchslap the liars by starting by advocating the annihilation of the stupid little animals, the ptarmigan, moose, whatever. There goes the PETA smear.
2-Point out that little discrepency and then ask how many sheikhs and emirs you'l be talking to in order to get at the couple of drops?
Close by asking how they can live with themselves as an American thinkking purely in terms of petrochemicals/dhimmitude (which are the same thing).
Drilling in ANWR is shortsighted, but is NOT a problem of overpopulation. It is a problem of lack of imagination and creativity in dealing with the declining supply of fossil fuels.
ever been to ANAWR? I didn't think so. It's big, and the portion for drilling is a useless mudhole.
Kerry will fight this. I don't know if that makes him a progressive or not but somebody has to fight for the environment. We are approaching the "Save the humans" phase of environmental degradation.
But the word of god tells us to "go forth and multiply".The Bushies absolutely know the word of god is the answer to all our problems. In other words we are fucked.
mallfish,
You have a point. Democrats as well as bloggers tend to be reactive. To get ahead of the ball we need ideas and leaders. We can be agressive without being biatchy.
Like this one: If the oil companies want oil in ANWR, we the American people should vote on how much to charge them to use OUR property and resources. No more communist no bid contracts. What American could be against that idea?
Yoshimi
Better yet, nationalize it - pay Americans to lease what is "our" land, and compensate us for the profits the oil generates.
ANWR is not Chevron/Texaco's playground - it belongs to us, the American people. So pay up, motherfuckers.
The rethugs have used drilling in the coastal plain of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (don't call it ANWR--it cheapens the place) to tie up the entire enironmental community for years now. If they do succeed in opening up drilling, they think that they will have won the fight against the crazy tree huggers. Bullshit.
If Arctic is opened up, we will see an environmental community more energized than ever to fight. Brower did it in the 50s against similar odds, we can do it again.
Hayduke Lives.
I'm with those that say ANWR is just a symbol. Even in the best case it won't produce enough oil to make a noticable difference in our reliance on oil imports. ANWR is just a chance for the rightists to show their dislike for "tree huggers".
Oh and by the way, what happened to all the old school Conservatives? The ones whoe belwived in "small government", "fiscal responsibility", "individual freedom" and "the right to disagree with the President". Some even thought conservation and good stewardship of the land was a good idea. Where did they all go, does anyone know?
There is definitly some sheer meaness in it. The Bush type seem to have some kind of macho investement into seeing who can damage the enviornment the most. They are proud of it, probably gain status in their degenerate circles this way.
But in the end it's mostly about money.
Would Jesus approve of drilling in the Alaskan wilderness?
"ever been to ANAWR? I didn't think so. It's big, and the portion for drilling is a useless mudhole."
well, troll, I HAVE been there.
It's a prolific coastal plain. "mud" is not the operative word... though I suppose as global warming proceedes, tundra (which is very wet under the vegetative cover) could turn muddy.
You would like it there... you'll find lots of your fellow bloodsuckers of the invertebrate kind
"ever been to ANAWR? I didn't think so. It's big, and the portion for drilling is a useless mudhole."
well, troll, I HAVE been there.
It's a prolific coastal plain. "mud" is not the operative word... though I suppose as global warming proceedes, tundra (which is very wet under the vegetative cover) could turn muddy.
You would like it there... you'll find lots of your fellow bloodsuckers of the invertebrate kind
Everyone in America should be required to see Terry Gilliam's film "Brazil".
A wonderful scene occurs in which the hero and his dreamgirl escape from the city, just ahead of their pursuers, down a highway lined on both sides by billboards that completely obscure the wasted lands behind them.
It reminds me of the time I flew into Seattle and, while still inflight over the mountains, could see the clearcut mountaintops behind the cosmetic fringe of pine forest that timber companies had left to 'hide' their predation on the forest.
When you're on the ground in Vancouver, BC, or on Vancouver Island, the fringe of trees lines both sides of the road, but you can see through it most of the time to the bald fields beyond.
It's truly disgusting, especially when they tell you most of the wood has been shipped to Japan for chopsticks and such. I hope this ain't true, but why should anybody lie about the wasted forest?
I'm sure we got our share of lumber for construction and furniture.
If everyone does it, why not you.
After all almost every country on the planet does it. best example:
look at the locations of most deserts on earth, and youll see that they correspond to some of the oldest populated sites of humanity.
Even thousands of years ago, humankind wasted its environment. WE are the cancer of this planet, GREED KILLS but profits some in the process.
May be massive climate changes will take care of humanity, like a good mass extinction of humans.
Just may be that mother earth, will do away with humanity and start anew with another specie to be her CARETAKER. Couldn't be worst than what we have now.
Interestingly, the environment was NOT one of the issues brought up in the debates or in any of the discussions pre-election. Even in the debate that was supposed to be about domestic issues, there wasn't a single question about the environment. Pity, really, because that's Kerry's strong suit.
However, I like the idea of demanding that any drilling in ANWR be linked to an increase in CAFE standards. I also like the idea that the people who want to do the drilling should pay us -- this is OUR land, not private property, and the American people deserve to be compensated.
Frankly, I'm wondering if we shouldn't start hammering on the whole issue of no-bid contracts in general. It seems to me that that's a frame that would win a lot of people over. I mean, we can all argue about terrorism and what's the best way to fight it, but even people who claim to be conservatives, and people who support the Republicans because "it's my money" should be concerned at the idea that this administration is throwing OUR money away and violating every standard of good business. I thought the whole notion of contracting things to the lowest bidder, rather than just giving the jobs away to your friends at whatever cost, was a pretty well entrenched idea in American culture, business as well as politics. Why not push that line for a while?
Let's just eat the newborn babies.
Certain people have been freaking out about imminent global shortages and collapse due to overpopulation since at least the time of Malthus. They've always been wrong.
"Certain people have been freaking out about imminent global shortages and collapse due to overpopulation since at least the time of Malthus. They've always been wrong."
Obviously, the world can hold an infinite number of Humans.
So, I'm hesitant to make this post, 'cause quite frankly I expect people to jump down my throat about it... but I figure if anyone's going to be open to a dialogue about the issues, I'd hope this group is.
So, I'm an Alaskan. I'm also, fairly recently, a petroleum engineer (I'm about to finish up my master's degree in it, since its the closest thing to a chemical engineering program up here). I'm also pro-ANWR.
Yes, I have been to the area that they're discussing opening. Yes, I have seen the current drilling operations on the North Slope. No, the statements about there only being a six-month supply are not terribly accurate. Yes, the majority of Alaskans support ANWR (including the democrat who just lost the recent senate race, Knowles, who I worked for and who was mentioned on this site).
Now, some of you might wonder why I support ANWR. The answer is complicated:
1. I think this can be developed in an environmentally friendly way. Anyone who hasnt seen how oil is being produced here might not understand... when I went to the North Slope, my first thought was "that's it?". Practically nothing on the horizon, yet thousands of barrels were being produced from each ultra-small well.
2. I think environmental statements about caribou herds are greatly skewed. The original environmental impact surveys on Prudoe bay and the ANWR region concluded that we should be drilling in ANWR, not Prudoe bay, 'cause it'd be better for the environment. Yet we went ahead with Prudoe anyways, and the Caribou herds actually have done better than expected in that region.
3. No one really knows how much oil, natural gas, and gas hydrates are available in ANWR. The simple drilling tests that would give us an idea of what were present have been blocked for decades. If there's no oil there, oil companies won't drill. Trust in their greed... it costs a lot to drill up North, and if there isnt a hella lot of profit in it for them, they wont bother.
4. (And this is sorta a side issue) ANWR really should be state land, not federal land. Alaska's been a state for a very short period (approx. fifty years), but unlike every other state in the Union, very little of the federal holdings were transfered to state control once territory status was lost. According to the statehood agreements signed by Congress, ANWR shouldnt really be a federal holding anymore... but since its a spiffy little strawman for Congress, they drag this stuff out in the courts.
Clearly a state-dependant on the oil industry is going to be a losing proposition in the long run. Clearly much more could be accomplished by increasing MPG for all classes of vehicles, by using low-sulphur fuels, by moving gradually to a NG economy supplemented by geothermal/wind power... but ANWR can be a boon to my state for a handful of generations, and make the transition much easier for everyone here. Why do people need to be so hostile to that?
Too many people? go figure.
Sure, the Earth's K value (carrying capacity) may be higher than 4 billion, but the K+ (the carrying capacity which is sustainable long term) has long since been passed.
Bacteria and cancers breed like this.
This topic always gets me mad. 95% of Alaska's North Slope is open to exploration. Why do they have to go after the other 5% that is special? Stop them now - email your "elected" official today!
Bush and these cousin-fuckers aren't worried about the environment.
Hell, the RAPTURE is coming.
I hope they aren't sitting with their thumbs up their asses waiting for THAT fairy tale to become fact.
They're gonna get real uncomfortable!
Isn't Alaska part of Cracker Nation....the nitwit states who voted for Monkey Boy?
Going after ANWR isn't so much an environmental issue in itself as it is a political issue. Conservation--even the most commonsensical measures, much less what Avory Lovins and his ilk tell us is possible with off-the-shelf-technology--trumps any conceivable new resource discovery. It isn't being pushed just because Carter is said to have looked 'silly' in his sweater. Huge interests are at stake.
The case must be made that conservation, alternative energy resources and environmental remediation would provide a huge economic boon, not merely that they are the right things to do.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
