Now he wants Americans to conserve energy
Interesting that after saying he won't budge on tax cuts or on the highway bill that has enough fat in it to rebuild the entire Gulf Coast, George Bush now wants Americans to conserve energy. Is he serious?
posted by mochi at 12:07 PM
6 Comments:
How do the tax cuts or highway bill (which I agree is disgustingly full of pork) affect the cost of gasoline? Releasing the strategic oil reserves is a way to increase supply and therefore lower costs. The other side of the equation is easing demand, which will also help to lower costs.
Supply and demand, its how the economy works. Increase the first, lower the second, prices drop.
My point is that he is asking for citizens to be responsible for energy conservation while pushing an agenda that is fiscally irresponsible.
I see your point, I just don't think the two are connected.
If your father is an alcoholic and he admonishes you for smoking marijuana is he hypocritical?
Not to mention that he has proven from his actions he has no concern for the environment, especially to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Why would he? His family wealth was built from oil.
He is only preaching a temporary scale back of demand now (which won't happen) because people are pissed at him.
Alcoholism and pot-smoking are at least connected by the fact they are both drug abuse.
Yes, Bush is fiscally irresponsible. He spends like, well, a Liberal. Some say even worse than a Liberal. But come on, people are bitching about the price of gas, which the Feds can only control to a very limited degree by releasing the strategic reserves. Unless you all really want to see the government setting prices, the best solution is to reduce demand.
You're griping about different problems. Actually, you're griping about a couple of problems and the proposed solution to another problem that you're not even griping about (the cost of gasoline).
Telling people they should conserve energy in a time of energy shortages, while spending record amounts of money on entitlement programs, does not make Bush hypocritical because one has nothing to do with the other.
And saying he's hypocritical because he has not followed what you consider to be an environmentally friendly program doesn't jive either. Isn't energy conservation part of that environementally friendly program? Rather than seeing this as a possible first step in the right direction you just call him a hypocrite. Berating Bush for not being environmentally friendly, then criticizing him when he proposes action that is, is itself hypocritical.
And if we're too stupid to realize Bush doesn't control the price of gas, and that the best way to lower that price right now, is to reduce demand, that's our fault. Bush did not cause higher gas prices. But he has offered a solution. It's up to us to decide if we want to heed good advice.
Post a Comment
<< Home