Posted on 10/07/2002 11:16:31 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:57:41 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Politics, they say, is the art of compromise. You give something, I give something. In the end, we wind up with something everyone's happy with.
That's how worthwhile legislation is forged, right?
Yes, usually. But compromise could earn a bad name from the old-fashioned "horse-trading" under way as federal lawmakers try to hammer out a deal over energy legislation they hope to send President Bush sometime soon.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Presumably, it's to provide Americans a safe, secure, plentiful supply of energy at affordable prices. Energy brings growth; growth brings economic vitality, and economic vitality brings a higher standard of living.
The author identifies the goal for only one side of the debate.
The other side has a quite different goal: to protect the muskeg, mosquitos and tundra from the depredations of American energy companies, thereby wounding capitalism and bringing us closer to a socialist society.
Accordingly, Congressional negotiators don't have a whole helluva lot of common ground to find...
Let's Roll !!
The RATS are in disarray...eradicate the rodents !!
Fire Democrats, Hire Republicans !!
GWB Is The Man !!
Snuff Saddam, NOW !!
Death To all Tyrant's !!
The Second Amendment...
America's Original Homeland Security !!
Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!
Molon Labe !!
BTTT!
Thanks for the post, JH2. And, thanks for the pings, TG and mad.
I thought it deserved a bump of it's own...
The truth is, before proceeding privately to set it up ourselves, we briefed staffers for a lot of these folks.
We found no interest coming back from all these "leaders" in proceeding along a path of deployment that will give us energy independence in far less time than it will take to start traditional production in ANWR by alternative production of oil and other conventional fuels, coupled with better altervative hydrocarbon fuel and engines followed by the deployment of non HC fuels.
The reason why our officials refuse to take a different path that would actually solve the problem, and would have prevented the Terror in the first place,can be found in a number of places, but two are:
the sidetracking of government research into the answer by what appears to have been a relatively low level corruption of the process, and
Saudi maneuvering that "helped" us by killing innovative technology that would have brought the solution to deployment by the end of the 1980's by which tme the oil companies had effectively become tools of Saudi policy.
BUMP!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.