[geeks] One of the things I love about America

[Eric Dittman]

> > > Bullshit.  The drilling in '1%' of ANWR is bogus math.  That's like saying
> > > my office only takes up 15 square feet because that's all that's touching
> > > the floor.  The '1%' doesn't count the roads and infrastructure to make
> > > the drilling possible.
> 
> > That still doesn't address the fact that the Alaska Pipeline
> > increased the populations of the indigent species.
> 
> Then how about this:  Drilling != Pipeline
> 
> You are comparing exploratory drilling and then production to an oil
> pipeline to transport oil.  Not the same.

No, but the granolas made the same claims about the Alaskan
Pipeline that they are making about drilling in the ANWR.
Why listen to them again when they were wrong the first time?

> [better emissions standards]
> 
> > I'm all for that.  The grandfather clauses for old vehicles and
> > the monetary limits on bringing non-compliant vehicles to code
> > need to be dropped, too, along with emissions controls on all
> > engines, whether they are on the road or not.
> 
> I don't think outlawing vehicles that were legal when purchased
> is: 1)fair or 2) practical.  It seems like an argument to get the
> limits shut down to start with.  Who's going to want to buy a new
> vehicle because congress made their 6 month old SUV illegal?
> Would it help sooner?  Yes.  Would it hurt lots of people in the
> meantime?  Yes.

There's no reason to allow grossly-violating vehicles to remain
on the road.  If you argue that outlawing vehicles that were
legal when purchased is not fair or practical, why is it fair
that companies be forced to change their equipment to comply
with new environmental laws?

Those old cars cause a LOT of pollution.

> > > The reason why ANWR drilling is wanted is because it'll make more money
> > > for the domestic oil companies.  That's it.  It won't signigificantly
> > > lessen our dependance on foreign oil.  It's not that much oil anyway.
> 
> > Most of the people bitching about the domestic oil companies
> > making money and having influence in the White House are
> > the same people that said Communist China having influence
> > in the White House was no big deal.  I'd rather have the
> > influence domestic rather than hostile foreign.
> 
> I don't feel either is right.  I feel the voters should be represented.
> Maybe I'm old-fashioned.  Our government is not ebay.  Laws and policies
> should not be written to specifically benefit the highest bidder.

I wish we all had representation, but we don't.  The government
responds to the biggest money, and the people that can change
that are the ones that benefit.

> > This is true, but remember most of Al Queda and Taliban money
> > did come from sales of drugs for the west (which they liked
> > as they could feed their war against the west by using the
> > corruption of the west).
> 
> Oh, that's right, because NONE of the Al Qaeda money came from Saudi Arabia.
> And Enron wasn't in negotiations with the Taliban to build a pipeline
> through Afghanistan only a month or two before hand.

I didn't say all of the money, I said most of the money.

> Nobody makes a big deal about the oil connection to terrorism because there's
> too much money in it and no one wants to go through the inconvenience of
> having to do without.  But drugs have already been labelled "BAD".

Drugs are bad in that the taxpayers have to pay for rehab
programs and welfare for addicts.

> Oh, and our big concern about drugs?  The Afghan poppy fields are already
> being replanted.  Not a lot of press about that, is there?  After all, the
> current government is our friend.

And we should be making a stink about that, too.
-- 
Eric Dittman
dittman at dittman.net
Check out the DEC Enthusiasts Club at http://www.dittman.net/