![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Unused Mental Milage
Jan. 31st, 2006 11:58 pmSo the President tonight said that we need to work on cutting dependance from middle east oil. This is a decent thought, especially since our, and the rest of the world's funding of the regimes in the region keeps the area unstable. Not having to deal with these guys would certainly help our relations with the area, though it would probably not be very good for Israel.
Of course the President's target for this fine goal is 2025. What a brave, bold stance that won't be needed to really be worked on by this administration at all. Sure, he pulled a Carter with trying to promote alternative energy, hybrid batteries and ethanol, in fact, the idea of more nuclear (please, pronounce that correctly) power, but will there be anything from the government to promote this? Heck, we're still talking about opening ANWAR to drilling, which doesn't sound like progress.
Most of the rest of the speech seem to deal with two messages, "we're still going to go down this path," and "we know better than you, so here's what we want you to do." Both messages seem to come from the same hubris that this administration always exhibits, ignoring criticism, attacking critics, and refusing to acknowledge any other viewpoint than their own.
Seth (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
slothel) had a great, short post about this phenomenon over the weekend. In speaking about not working with Hamas because they are a terrorist group, he totally glossed over that the Palestinians had a democratic election and the people voted in who they wanted. As you can guess, democracy and freedom are only important when it serves your own agenda.
In other arenas, security and safety are important when they get to control what happens, or gets said, or who is allowed to travel. Nation building is important as long as the dictator you disagreed with is gone and a potential for development and oil money exists for you and your cronies, running up government deficits are important as long as you can help fund religious organizations and turn programs from prevention and research to abstinence.
Of course the biggest example of the administrations desire not to deal with issues they don't like is the response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Only when it was politically necessary did the President take action, blanketing the issue with press photo ops and promises. as soon as the media moved on, then the administration and congress did little to back up those promises, hoping that they could get away with doing the littlest actions needed.
Let's face it, this administration and the congress have turned the whole conservative movement from reducing government's impact on individuals and responsible spending to what can government do to reenforce your worldview. To me that's a rather big abuse of powers.
I find it interesting that scandal after scandal go by, and we've now become so accustom to this, it barely registers. There's now no sense of outrage, since it's expected that everyone is a crook and they've all got their hands in the cookie jar. It's interesting to see the strategy that this administration has had for choosing new judges and justices. Really, the conservative judges are picked only partially for their views, but more for their support of the executive branch's expansion of powers, and disregard for the checks and balances in the system. The are preparing for the possibility, and maybe inevitability that they are going to be called to explain their actions, but they'll be fine is they have already stacked the deck.
Of course, they may never have to worry if they stay in power and don't really have to face any major opposition. Certainly the Democrats haven't been able to land a punch, especially as it seems like they have every opportunity.
It's sad that we have leaders who's best defense against a scandal or illegal act are just to go out and say "did not" or "so what, everybody does it!" The fact that the people live with this really shows that the majority of people can't be bothered to get informed and get involved, and if no one believes change could happen, why should they bother?
People are happy to laugh at the dunce, but seem to accept his behavior. Why is that?
Who knows, maybe we can work on trying to eliminate his negative effects by the year 2025. Certainly that's a reasonable goal, right?
Of course the President's target for this fine goal is 2025. What a brave, bold stance that won't be needed to really be worked on by this administration at all. Sure, he pulled a Carter with trying to promote alternative energy, hybrid batteries and ethanol, in fact, the idea of more nuclear (please, pronounce that correctly) power, but will there be anything from the government to promote this? Heck, we're still talking about opening ANWAR to drilling, which doesn't sound like progress.
Most of the rest of the speech seem to deal with two messages, "we're still going to go down this path," and "we know better than you, so here's what we want you to do." Both messages seem to come from the same hubris that this administration always exhibits, ignoring criticism, attacking critics, and refusing to acknowledge any other viewpoint than their own.
Seth (
slothel) had a great, short post about this phenomenon over the weekend. In speaking about not working with Hamas because they are a terrorist group, he totally glossed over that the Palestinians had a democratic election and the people voted in who they wanted. As you can guess, democracy and freedom are only important when it serves your own agenda.In other arenas, security and safety are important when they get to control what happens, or gets said, or who is allowed to travel. Nation building is important as long as the dictator you disagreed with is gone and a potential for development and oil money exists for you and your cronies, running up government deficits are important as long as you can help fund religious organizations and turn programs from prevention and research to abstinence.
Of course the biggest example of the administrations desire not to deal with issues they don't like is the response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Only when it was politically necessary did the President take action, blanketing the issue with press photo ops and promises. as soon as the media moved on, then the administration and congress did little to back up those promises, hoping that they could get away with doing the littlest actions needed.
Let's face it, this administration and the congress have turned the whole conservative movement from reducing government's impact on individuals and responsible spending to what can government do to reenforce your worldview. To me that's a rather big abuse of powers.
I find it interesting that scandal after scandal go by, and we've now become so accustom to this, it barely registers. There's now no sense of outrage, since it's expected that everyone is a crook and they've all got their hands in the cookie jar. It's interesting to see the strategy that this administration has had for choosing new judges and justices. Really, the conservative judges are picked only partially for their views, but more for their support of the executive branch's expansion of powers, and disregard for the checks and balances in the system. The are preparing for the possibility, and maybe inevitability that they are going to be called to explain their actions, but they'll be fine is they have already stacked the deck.
Of course, they may never have to worry if they stay in power and don't really have to face any major opposition. Certainly the Democrats haven't been able to land a punch, especially as it seems like they have every opportunity.
It's sad that we have leaders who's best defense against a scandal or illegal act are just to go out and say "did not" or "so what, everybody does it!" The fact that the people live with this really shows that the majority of people can't be bothered to get informed and get involved, and if no one believes change could happen, why should they bother?
People are happy to laugh at the dunce, but seem to accept his behavior. Why is that?
Who knows, maybe we can work on trying to eliminate his negative effects by the year 2025. Certainly that's a reasonable goal, right?
