We would have been better off these last four years if Maxwell Smart had been in charge of our energy policy.
Energy policy? How about foreign policy? Even Maxwell Smart could have figured out that Iraq didn't have WMDs!
Posted by redstater at September 26, 2005 04:23 PMWMD's ... missed 'em by *that* much ...
Posted by Jim Faith at September 26, 2005 04:35 PMWe would have been better off these last four years if Maxwell Smart had been in charge of our energy policy.
You know it's rather sad. I grew up wih Max, and for all his bumbling, I have no doubt at all that America would be a better place, in all respects, if 86 were in charge the last five years. At least Max would admit "99, I think I just hurt myself".
Posted by tempus at September 26, 2005 04:35 PMGood luck finding mass transit in the suburbs.
Posted by Sharon at September 26, 2005 04:35 PM.....and tell '99' that I'm loving it, Chief!.....and who is that pork chop in the middle...knows his way aroung the buffet table, somebody pass him the Maalox!
Posted by Goyo at September 26, 2005 05:03 PMFarewell, 86.
Isn't it odd that Maxwell Smart's number was exactly double Dumbya's (43)? Could it be a sign that Smart was twice as smart as Dumbya?
Hmmmmmmm ....
Conserving gas: The thing I will be watching for is the response of the public to this royal edict. If Bu$h inspires fewer drivers to drive less (and more conservatively), this will be a good thing.
Here in SoCal, though, it has seemed like the higher gas prices went, the more drivers were on the road - and the worse they drove.
Emulating their Leedur, perhaps?
Posted by pessimist at September 26, 2005 05:06 PMTo hell with this. I'm driving my Bronto™ everywhere, 3 gals/mile be damned!
Can't this guy remember what happened the last time a president called for shared sacrifice because of energy shortages and a blown Middle East strategy?
Jimmy Carter--History's Worst Monster!
Posted by joe sixpack at September 26, 2005 05:14 PMThe guy in the middle is the Secretary of Energy,
Samuel Bodman. Unlike previous incumbents (that included a dentist from South Carolina under Reagan), Bodman actually has technical qualifications (Ph. D. in Chemical Engineering
from MIT).
Mr. Sixpack:
Your have to realize that Mr. Bush's recollection of the late 1970's is somewhat clouded by a stunning quantity of coke, Jack Daniel's and women whose name he can't remember. And that was after he was married. In addition, he was mentoring Keith Richards on Advanced Coke Techniques during this period.
However, I can see that it would be fair to compare a man who started two optional wars and divided his country with a man who won the Nobel Peace Prize. The logic is flawless, I admit.
Posted by tempus at September 26, 2005 05:27 PMThe guy in the middle is the Secretary of Energy,
Samuel Bodman.
This is true, and will be until Mr. Bodman points out "Mr. President, you are one dumb-ass f*ck, aren't you". He will be fired, and subsequently re-hired as a consultant for FEMA, where his opinion will be of no consequence.
Posted by tempus at September 26, 2005 05:40 PMIt's pretend conservation. Still, we're watching the Jimmy Carterization of Bush's second term. Is that "Taps" I hear?
Posted by steve duncan at September 26, 2005 06:01 PMI LOVE this item. Great pairing of serious information with humor. I came across it shortly after writing my own short tribute to Don Adams (http://welcometolimbo.blogspot.com/2005/09/would-you-believe.html). Keep up the excellent work!
Posted by J. Kingston Pierce at September 26, 2005 06:24 PMTempus, or Bodman quites in disgust like all the others.
Posted by Judith at September 26, 2005 06:27 PMThe mentioning of Jimmy Carter is appropriate since he was the last president to care about conservation ...
Posted by muckdog at September 26, 2005 06:34 PMI can see that it would be fair to compare a man who started two optional wars and divided his country with a man who won the Nobel Peace Prize. The logic is flawless, I admit.
You take that back! Logic is for pussies and Vulcans!
Posted by tom christensen at September 26, 2005 06:57 PMOh, so "conservation" is now Bushco policy....I doubt this was cleared with President Cheney.
Does that mean the super-SUV tax deduction (which really did boost sales of these horrendous disasters) will soon be repealed?
ooops...I forgot, every "policy" involving economic regulation is "voluntary" in Right Wing Land.
Posted by euzoius at September 26, 2005 07:06 PM
Conservation: a careful preservation and protection of something; planned management of a natural resource to prevent exploitation.
Get serious.
I'm sure Bush was as sincere in his suggestion of conserving energy as he was in accepting responsibility for the federal government's response (or lack thereof) to Katrina.
Bush cares about conservation as much as he cares about the poor: not one lick of concern.
Posted by ann at September 26, 2005 07:49 PMThe mentioning of Jimmy Carter is appropriate since he was the last president to care about conservation ...
And Carter remains the last president to care about conservation.
Posted by at September 26, 2005 08:38 PMUnder Carter we had a tax credit for installing solar heating on/in your home. A former neighbor of mine hurrried to take advantege of this credit in the early 80's because Reagan gutted it in his first budget. (I guess solar heating was somehow antithetical to supply side economics at the time.) We've lost 20+ of growth in the solar heating area thanks to Reagan. How much better shape would we be in today, both economically and environmentally, with 20 years of potentially large scale growth in solar technology!
Posted by rlp at September 26, 2005 09:04 PMrlp, I have thought and said the same thing for so long. I remember the stickers next to light switches and still out of habit turn off the light when I leave a room. I go around turning out lights in empty classrooms at work.
We only recently got deregulation of electricity provifers -- which gives us the opportunity to go to companies like GreenMountain instead of Reliant -- 30 years later.
I don't believe that conservation will take hold at all. The big oil companies will simply maintain their strangle-hold on consumers.
Posted by dorita at September 26, 2005 09:42 PMWell, rlp, the Democrats in cA are killing the solar energy bill. Oh well.
The good news is that the private sector is seeing the demand for conservation, and Ford said that by 2010, half of their cars will be hybrids.
Toyota and Honda are way ahead of them, but nice to see that US automakers read the paper once and awhile.
Posted by muckdog at September 26, 2005 09:55 PMActually if you all were more interested in conservation from an environmental sense you should be battling house bill 3824 which is designed to reward developers who buy land which has endangered species with payments and then make it easier for them to destroy those habitats.
Since this is still a bill and not a law action and a bright spotlight on it's stupidity might prevent it from becoming law. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/press/pombo9-19-05.html
OTEC, so what's your point? This post is about w's most recent statements regarding conserving energy. The house bill you referenced has been on google news for the past few days at least. Just what are you implying? That the reader's here don't care about the environment because if they did, there would be comments about house bill 3824 on this thread? What makes you think "you all" aren't doing what you suggest?
What I think is actually in play is that you can't defend this president's lack of an energy policy, and so your only tatic is to try to change the subject and in doing so, bring up some supposed lack of interest on the part of the posters/commenters/readers here.
Posted by dorita at September 27, 2005 07:40 AM