“Don’t use oil.” Because I forecast the powerlessness of Mr. Cheney, honora, and everyone else to safely turn the United States on a dime, I don’t understand why it’s important that the “oil-based policy” be tagged as “Cheney’s.” Parties and partisans come and go, but oil consumption remains and even grows.

And so we come to my agreement with honora, such as it is: The actions of the rulers of the United States to secure a supply of oil for their country do seem “lame.” They build vast armies in land, sea, and air–and let their enemies live. In fact, they protect their enemies, as in Saudi Arabia, let them profit from oil sales, and let them use the profits to promote a killer religion. They could kill their enemies and take what their country needs in order to maintain its freedom and power. Instead they fiddle with “policy” and policing, while circumstances steadily worsen. In that sense, I’ll agree the “policy” is “lame.”

Kralizec on April 15, 2007 at 4:29 PM

I don’t think anyone is naive enought to suggest “turning on a dime”, but simply because an undertaking–lessening our oil jones–is daunting, is that any reason not to start going down that path?

And so we come to my agreement with honora, such as it is: The actions of the rulers of the United States to secure a supply of oil for their country do seem “lame.” They build vast armies in land, sea, and air–and let their enemies live. In fact, they protect their enemies, as in Saudi Arabia, let them profit from oil sales, and let them use the profits to promote a killer religion. They could kill their enemies and take what their country needs in order to maintain its freedom and power. Instead they fiddle with “policy” and policing, while circumstances steadily worsen. In that sense, I’ll agree the “policy” is “lame.”

Kralizec on April 15, 2007 at 4:29 PM

Yup. It always amazes me that the left calls us “fascist” and claims that we are an “empire.”

And yet the plain truth is that if we were remotely fascist or like any real empire in history, our foriegn policy would be remarkably different.

If we were anything like liberals claim, Venezuela would already be the 51st state, Iran would be about to become the 52nd, and we wouldn’t have much to worry about when it comes to oil.

As I’ve said before … if we’re really an “empire,” we’ve gotta be the lamest empire that ever was.

In principle, I don’t mind them nuking one another, however, Israel is in the way and one of those nukes will find its way to we infidels. Oh well, at least those radiation particles will wash away political correctness once and for all.

Sorta makes that whole oil based energy policy of Cheney’s look a little lame.

honora on April 15, 2007 at 12:50 PM

I’m attempting to repost this comment, because it seems to have been swallowed up by the earth the first time.

I was moved at first to take up this remark and say in what way I could agree with it, but it doesn’t present an opinion that’s clear enough or definite enough to allow one to do more than guess what’s meant. I don’t understand the way “policy” is supposed to be effective and yet somehow compatible with the freedoms offered by a liberal democracy. Because of the incompatibility I detect, I see an “oil-based policy” broadly as little more than a recognition that the United States has used, does use, and will go on using vast amounts of oil even if both Vice President Cheney and honora clench their little fists and tell everyone, “Don’t use oil.” Because I forecast the powerlessness of Mr. Cheney, honora, and everyone else to safely turn the United States on a dime, I don’t understand why it’s important that the “oil-based policy” be tagged as “Cheney’s.” Parties and partisans come and go, but oil consumption remains and even grows.

And so we come to my agreement with honora, such as it is: The actions of the rulers of the United States to secure a supply of oil for their country do seem “lame.” They build vast armies in land, sea, and air–and let their enemies live. In fact, they protect their enemies, as in Saudi Arabia, let them profit from oil sales, and let them use the profits to promote a killer religion. They could kill their enemies and take what their country needs in order to maintain its freedom and power. Instead they fiddle with “policy” and policing, while circumstances steadily worsen. In that sense, I’ll agree the “policy” is “lame.”

Keep playing that fiddle numbnuts.

honora on April 15, 2007 at 12:50 PM

Certainly there is a numbnut here and there, on all sides; however, you must feel good about yourself today, to make such a blanket statement.

If all of these countries would have stayed colonies, this stuff never would have happened.

Mojave Mark on April 15, 2007 at 12:34 PM

LOL. Unfortunately I think we are the ones that started breaking that old colonial yoke. Kinda miss the old “white man’s burden” notion……

I can’t wait to hear what General Pelosi and General Murtha have to say on this topic….

Zorro on April 14, 2007 at 8:03 PM

Funny I was hoping to hear what Bush had to say. Sorta makes that whole oil based energy policy of Cheney’s look a little lame. Wonder if old Dick still thinks conservation is a matter of “personal virtue”. Keep playing that fiddle numbnuts.

once they all destroy themselves can we have their oil

Actually, that’s an interesting question. Do we have the technology to drill or refine non-radioactive oil or gas from a contaminated zone?

Weather Report for Tehran and environs

Outlook for today is partly sunny with a brief period of ultra-bright light, brighter than the sun, followed by winds vastly exceeding hurricane strength for part of the day. A strong wind advisory is being issued for the city of Tehran and outlying areas. Today’s high temperature will be 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit tapering off to -20 degrees F tonight. Possible snow this evening.

Detailed forecast follows…
Sunrise: 0612 (local) Temperature: 45 degrees F., wind out of the East at 6kts, gusting to 950kts by noon.

Noon: Very heavy radioactive overcast with very dusty conditions at ground level. Heavy smoke limiting visibility to less than 1/8 mile at Tehran Intl. Airport, causing flight delays well into the next decade. High temperature 10,000 degrees but falling in the afternoon to 300 degrees, wind toward the city at 150 kts.

Afternoon: Radioactive rain combined with heavy smoke and overcast conditions will cause the temperature to drop to -20 degrees Fahrenheit by midnight. Radioactive rain possibly turning to snow by sunset.

Sunset: 1930 (local). Heavy radioactive overcast and poor visibility due to blowing and drifting smoke.

WIND ADVISORY:
Extremely strong gusts exceeding 950 kts are expected in the the greater Tehran metropolitan area for part of the day. Expect delays due to collapsed bridges, overpasses, heavy radioactive smoke, and overturned semis. Afternoon wind speed and direction will drop to 150 kts into Tehran city center.

WINTER STORM ADVISORY:
High winds and drifting or blowing sand, accompanied by heavy smoke and radioactivity will cause hazardous driving conditions for Tehran and nearby suburbs. The following cities are affected: Tehran. This advisory is in effect until 2300 tomorrow and may be extended indefinitely.

SUNSCREEN ADVISORY:
Due to extremely bright conditions, it is recommended that you remain indoors. If you must go outside, use a sunscreen preparation with a minimum SPF rating of 2 Million.

###

1: At least it will be quicker than death from ‘Global Warming’.

My thought too…don’t matter how warm we make it when a nuke blows.

Nukes don’t have liberal diversionary censors – they blow up REI not just Wal Mart. Actually, their whole idea is to blow up our “liberal” culture. A chill wind blows past Tim Robbins on his treadmill as he contemplates his next meaningful millions .

Whole damned Middle East set to go nuclear

And to think…if only Clinton were still president he’d still just be warning us about Saddam’s WMD’s.

1: At least it will be quicker than death from ‘Global Warming’.

2: If you DON’t die from a islamic nuclear bomb, maybe ‘Nuclear Winter’ will perfectly offset ‘Global Warming’ and everything will work out just right.

3: A big nuclear war, if it happens soon enough, might keep a Democrat out of the WhiteHouse for decades.

(Sorry about being flippant about what is likely to be one of the biggest dangers ever faced by humanity, but I’m about at the point of thinking that humanity in general deserves whatever it gets.)
————————————————–

Pinky: I can just precisely hear Fred! speaking your script.

Tick…tick…tick…

RedWinged Blackbird on April 14, 2007 at 7:57 PM

Indeed.

Will we wait until it’s too late and piss offthe world or do something about it and piss the world off anyways.

You got to love those damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenarios.

Kralizec on April 14, 2007 at 11:43 PM

I believe the thing that people are worked up over are the crazy’s behind those weapons. Those whose political agenda’s call for wiping Israel off the map – which is a unified opinion among most muslims there. That, and the fact that, well, 99.9% of terrorists who wish destruction on the U.S. have their origins in the middle east. I would prefer the middle east being a nuclear-free zone. It seems that’s not going to happen, so what is the next step? The only thing we have is diplomacy (yeah, right) and this missile defense sheild being tested by the Navy.

You needing to determine load-bearing for your reactor’s containment structure? Heck, just call the folks at San Onofre. I’m pretty sure their lines aren’t monitored…

Not me, infidel. I have my .30-30 lever action rifle.

RedWinged Blackbird on April 14, 2007 at 8:02 PM

I have a 30-30 too, but with my tax refund, I get THIS!!!