(no subject)
Sep. 21st, 2004 11:20 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sethrakAfter reading through some of the anti-Bush-on-grounds-of-DOMA links thoughtfully provided by ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
_redpanda_, I found a couple useful looking links to Bush-Cheney's plan for America, and Kerry/Edward's plan for America.
I'm still working my way through the Kerry plan. I plan to read through Bush's as well, eventually - not that it'll change my vote, since I am strongly anti-Bush for *many* reasons, DOMA among them. But damn..... Kerry's plan is an example of why I am having such a difficult time deciding whom I will be voting *for*, not just voting *against* Bush.
Not even done with the first chapter yet, and I'm about ready to ram my head into the keyboard in imitation of Don Music. Kerry's energy plan involves allowing drilling in ANWR. (Page 59 of the .pdf file) ::thud, thud, thud:: And increased use of coal - "clean coal", he calls it. But still.
I know there are no easy answers on finding clean, renewable, safe energy sources. But ANWR? And increased use of coal? Are there any coal sources left that can really make any kind of dent in our energy needs? Even assuming that coal can be cleanly extracted and utilized, which I am unwilling to assume? Shouldn't preserving the environment be a basic tenet of *all* Democrats' belief systems?
Also, what the heck does "Aggressively 'jawbone' oil producing nations to keep production levels high enough to stabilize oil and gasoline prices" mean? ::raised eyebrow, narrow look over the rims of her glasses::
I don't like the sound of that at all.
They also plan to increase use of the natural gas deposits on this continent. I have insufficient information to discuss the pros and cons of natural gas in general - but again, there is mention of a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope of Alaska. Great. A nice big explosive target for terrorists stretching from the far north of our nation, across Canada, and into the lower 48. The oil pipelines across Iraq are under constant threat from terrorists. Those pipelines are small, spread out, and the loss of any one doesn't necessarily shut down the entire Iraqi oil supply, just chokes it for a while. This proposed natural gas pipleline would be a lot bigger, more visible, and more vital to our nation's overall energy.
::head-desk::
And all this is contained in a chapter entitlted "Security".
Why, oh why, cannot my party provide me with a candidate who *thinks*?
Edit:davner just came home for a quick lunchbreak.
Dav: So Kerry wants a natural gas pipeline? ::shrug:: We already have the oil pipeline.
Me: Isn't natural gas more explosive than oil?
Dav: Not really. And anyway, the Iraqis are already blowing theirs up.
Me: Exactly! I'm amazed the Alaskan Pipeline hasn't been targeted.
Anybody got any information for me on what danger the Alaskan Pipeline is considered to be in, and what's been done about it?
_redpanda_, I found a couple useful looking links to Bush-Cheney's plan for America, and Kerry/Edward's plan for America.I'm still working my way through the Kerry plan. I plan to read through Bush's as well, eventually - not that it'll change my vote, since I am strongly anti-Bush for *many* reasons, DOMA among them. But damn..... Kerry's plan is an example of why I am having such a difficult time deciding whom I will be voting *for*, not just voting *against* Bush.
Not even done with the first chapter yet, and I'm about ready to ram my head into the keyboard in imitation of Don Music. Kerry's energy plan involves allowing drilling in ANWR. (Page 59 of the .pdf file) ::thud, thud, thud:: And increased use of coal - "clean coal", he calls it. But still.
I know there are no easy answers on finding clean, renewable, safe energy sources. But ANWR? And increased use of coal? Are there any coal sources left that can really make any kind of dent in our energy needs? Even assuming that coal can be cleanly extracted and utilized, which I am unwilling to assume? Shouldn't preserving the environment be a basic tenet of *all* Democrats' belief systems?
Also, what the heck does "Aggressively 'jawbone' oil producing nations to keep production levels high enough to stabilize oil and gasoline prices" mean? ::raised eyebrow, narrow look over the rims of her glasses::
I don't like the sound of that at all.
They also plan to increase use of the natural gas deposits on this continent. I have insufficient information to discuss the pros and cons of natural gas in general - but again, there is mention of a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope of Alaska. Great. A nice big explosive target for terrorists stretching from the far north of our nation, across Canada, and into the lower 48. The oil pipelines across Iraq are under constant threat from terrorists. Those pipelines are small, spread out, and the loss of any one doesn't necessarily shut down the entire Iraqi oil supply, just chokes it for a while. This proposed natural gas pipleline would be a lot bigger, more visible, and more vital to our nation's overall energy.
::head-desk::
And all this is contained in a chapter entitlted "Security".
Why, oh why, cannot my party provide me with a candidate who *thinks*?
Edit:
davner just came home for a quick lunchbreak. Dav: So Kerry wants a natural gas pipeline? ::shrug:: We already have the oil pipeline.
Me: Isn't natural gas more explosive than oil?
Dav: Not really. And anyway, the Iraqis are already blowing theirs up.
Me: Exactly! I'm amazed the Alaskan Pipeline hasn't been targeted.
Anybody got any information for me on what danger the Alaskan Pipeline is considered to be in, and what's been done about it?
