Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Crazy Crap / Media Are You 'America's Next Great Pundit'?
Posted by Ashley Spurgeon on Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Comments (2)
Showing 1-2 of 2
I can find no reason on Earth why I should enter this insipid contest. A lib commie rag like the Washington Post would never allow me to write 13 columns blaming the government for everything short of annoying Netflix pop-up ads and to call people out on their communism like a latter-day McCarthy.
"not on whether Post editors agree or disagree with your point of view."
Says you, commie rag. You'll just find some empty-headed lib to parrot the lefty opinions of the Washington Pravda.
like
dislike
Jonathan Swift and Lewis Carroll would have been defeated if our national energy policy were entered against them in a best satire competition. Our energy efforts, which combine pandering to special interests combined with a reliance on junk science, result in such wrongheaded decisions that the whole list of unintended consequences would be hilarious were not the most certain of those consequences guarantee the impoverishment of the nation.
Past and present idiotic administrative decisions coupled with Congressional stupidity would have seemed to be too broadly humorous to stand scrutiny as a skewering satire.
Let us itemize the roll of "are you KIDDING?"
decisions, to wit:
1. Bush's EPA overrules a compromise between the government and the nations refiners that would drop sulfuric compounds emitted in diesel fuel from 550 ppm to a very clean 150 ppm by insisting that it drop to 50 ppm. This forces the refiners to
utilize two times the hydrogen in cracking the diesel and makes diesel more expensive than gasoline for the first time ever.Whoops!
2. Congress insists on reducing dependence on foreign energy producers yet refuses to: allow further drilling onshore and offshore even though our scientists have so perfected clean on-and-offshore drilling site technologies (used extensively by all other energy producing nations viz China) and remediation of the land while preventing blowouts like the one that occurred in Santa Barbara in 1969 (forty years ago fer pete's sake.)
3.Congress ignores the new discoveries because to acknowledge them might offend their enviro paymasters. We do have amazing new discoveries in natural gas and oil domestically which would allow us to be energy self-sufficient for three centuries. Yet the head of the Department of the Interior reneged on the election year promise to allow offshore drilling until, um, 2012. That'll teach the sheiks and Big Oil.
4. Congress refuses to revisit vote-pandering mandates that corn-based ethanol be included in increasing amounts in formulation of gasoline. A few of the things wrong in these under-the-table payoffs to Iowa (first presidential primary state) and to Archer-Daniels-Midland:
a. Ethanol is too corrosive to be run through natural gas transmission pipelines so it must be trucked to and from refineries;
b. it provides less power than gasoline and requires more fill ups to get to a destination; and
c. it takes a large amount of the world's corn supply out of the marketplace, substituting its utilization as a commodity intended to FEED people for fuel for the hated SUV.
Satire? We could certainly regard the whole energy vs. big government fiasco as satire save the deadly serious intent of the majority to cripple the world's leading economy by adopting either Waxman Markey or Kerry Boxer. Why their intent is to do so is a question for psychiatrists and historians.
Or for another column from your intrepid observer.
