John McCain Supports Terrorism

This morning, while listening to CNN, I was amazed to hear John McCain, while speaking in Pennsylvania, claiming that low prices are not the answer to energy independence and that offshore oil drilling will help us increase our energy independence.

This is perhaps the most fantastically naive and stupid thing I’ve heard him say yet.

Or is it? Perhaps it’s calculated and well thought out. Let’s look at that.

Offshore oil drilling is going to barely increase the global capability for oil production. Low prices will perpetuate Americans love with cars that are guzzlers rather than forcing American automakers to start dealing with the fact that we require better gas mileage standards. In fact, I’ve read that one mile per gallon increase in average efficiency equates to a  fantastic amount of oil saved every single day – I thought I heard something on the order of 350 million barrels but my numbers are probably off. This suggests that the largest single oilfield we can find is sitting in our driveways.

The answer to energy independence is not increased access to oil, its decreased consumption of oil. Not only will decreased consumption increase our energy independence, it will assist with the looming global warming crisis as we burn fewer fossil fuels. In fact, the answer to energy independence is precisely skyrocketing oil prices. As prices go up, consumers will look for alternatives, the marketplace (automakers) will follow the consumers, and voila! We’ll be on the road to change American energy policy.

 So back to my original statement: John McCain supports terrorism. The problem is that so long as we purchase any oil from the Middle East we’re going to feel compelled to protect it i.e., protect our strategic energy interests. Which means that infidels will occupy the land of Allah, and the radical Muslims will continue to want to kill us. (Let’s not argue here about whether and not Muslims want to come here to kill us, it is because they feel we defile their land. We leave, tensions recede.  There will always be other terrorists, but Muslim radicals are predominately pissed off because we occupy their land.) Ergo, we purchase oil from the Middle East and we are we’re supporting terrorism. There’s no way around it, we can stick our head in the sands for as long as we want-but that is the truth. So regardless of if we drill off the coast of Nantucket,  or in the ANWAR, or the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, we will still continue to purchase oil from the Middle East because we simply don’t have enough to take care of ourselves here. And that means we’re  not just supporting terrorism, but actually creating and fomenting it.

So when you want to ask yourself, “is John McCain ready to lead?”  You might want to ask yourself, “lead me where?” Into a new problems in the Middle East? Into more profits for the multinational oil companies? Into further problems with greenhouse gas? Or simply lead my head back into the sand?

The Republican platform is not about protecting you: it is about profits (remember the whole “free market” thing – I’m not being extreme here). And if a little bit terrorism gets stirred up because we need some oil, that’s okay.

Because Halliburton needs its profits too. 

Comments

  1. braindonkey says:

    It’s all ironic and sad. Free market, good idea in theory, bad in reality unless it is 100% free, which it will never be since ‘something’ will always remain under controls.

    Republicans seem to think along the lines that the only way to ensure future and independence is by increasing supply. Democrats seem to believe that independence is achieved through reduction. Now to prove which party is right I give you this example.

    To become less dependent on cocaine, do you:
    a) reduce the amount of cocaine you consume.
    b) increase the amount of cocaine you consume.

    If you answered a, you are smart, if you answered b, you are a monkey.

    If you want to argue that oil is not the same as cocaine, try to live without oil for 1 week. I bet you reach the same level of anger, frustration, fear, anxiety, etc, that you reach quitting cocaine would cause, minus the physical addiction withdrawal.

    The fact is, that no bad situation is ever improved by making the bad thing more available. More coke = bigger addict. More fast food restaurants = more fat people. More guns = more murder. More gas = more usage.

    The only way to improve a bad habit is to remove the source of addiction, or offset it with a more positive effect from elsewhere.

    The only way anything is going to change is if this country just sucks it up, and pays for the change. We did it with the interstates and telephone and and and and. I don’t know why we can’t just do it with non-oil.

  2. perkiset says:

    Nice NBs, well said. I completely agree with the less=less requirement thought, except for sex… think about it ;)

    And thank you for the well thought out and pertinent post my friend. Have we purchased a transcriber as well…?