George Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld think you're stupid. Yes, they do.
They think they can take a mangled quip about President Bush and Iraq by John Kerry — a man who is not even running for office but who, unlike Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, never ran away from combat service — and get you to vote against all Democrats in this election.
Every time you hear Mr. Bush or Mr. Cheney lash out against Mr. Kerry, I hope you will say to yourself, "They must think I'm stupid." Because they surely do.
They think that they can get you to overlook all of the Bush team's real and deadly insults to the U.S. military over the past six years by hyping and exaggerating Mr. Kerry's mangled gibe at the president.
What could possibly be more injurious and insulting to the U.S. military than to send it into combat in Iraq without enough men — to launch an invasion of a foreign country not by the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force, but by the Rumsfeld Doctrine of just enough troops to lose? What could be a bigger insult than that?
What could possibly be more injurious and insulting to our men and women in uniform than sending them off to war without the proper equipment, so that some soldiers in the field were left to buy their own body armor and to retrofit their own jeeps with scrap metal so that roadside bombs in Iraq would only maim them for life and not kill them? And what could be more injurious and insulting than Don Rumsfeld's response to criticism that he sent our troops off in haste and unprepared: Hey, you go to war with the army you've got — get over it.
What could possibly be more injurious and insulting to our men and women in uniform than to send them off to war in Iraq without any coherent postwar plan for political reconstruction there, so that the U.S. military has had to assume not only security responsibilities for all of Iraq but the political rebuilding as well? The Bush team has created a veritable library of military histories — from "Cobra II" to "Fiasco" to "State of Denial" — all of which contain the same damning conclusion offered by the very soldiers and officers who fought this war: This administration never had a plan for the morning after, and we've been making it up — and paying the price — ever since.
And what could possibly be more injurious and insulting to our men and women in Iraq than to send them off to war and then go out and finance the very people they're fighting against with our gluttonous consumption of oil? Sure, George Bush told us we're addicted to oil, but he has not done one single significant thing — demanded higher mileage standards from Detroit, imposed a gasoline tax or even used the bully pulpit of the White House to drive conservation — to end that addiction. So we continue to finance the U.S. military with our tax dollars, while we finance Iran, Syria, Wahhabi mosques and Al Qaeda madrassas with our energy purchases.
Everyone says that Karl Rove is a genius. Yeah, right. So are cigarette companies. They get you to buy cigarettes even though we know they cause cancer. That is the kind of genius Karl Rove is. He is not a man who has designed a strategy to reunite our country around an agenda of renewal for the 21st century — to bring out the best in us. His "genius" is taking some irrelevant aside by John Kerry and twisting it to bring out the worst in us, so you will ignore the mess that the Bush team has visited on this country.
And Karl Rove has succeeded at that in the past because he was sure that he could sell just enough Bush cigarettes, even though people knew they caused cancer. Please, please, for our country's health, prove him wrong this time.
Let Karl know that you're not stupid. Let him know that you know that the most patriotic thing to do in this election is to vote against an administration that has — through sheer incompetence — brought us to a point in Iraq that was not inevitable but is now unwinnable.
Let Karl know that you think this is a critical election, because you know as a citizen that if the Bush team can behave with the level of deadly incompetence it has exhibited in Iraq — and then get away with it by holding on to the House and the Senate — it means our country has become a banana republic. It means our democracy is in tatters because it is so gerrymandered, so polluted by money, and so divided by professional political hacks that we can no longer hold the ruling party to account.
It means we're as stupid as Karl thinks we are.
I, for one, don't think we're that stupid. Next Tuesday we'll see.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 29
Very humorous, Lauren.
Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"
Ben....there you go again... being your own strtaight man....the only people insulting Bush ARE the MILTITARY ITSELF Lately....have you not seen their comments in the news over the last several weeks/months??/...oh, sorry, you watch Faux...
WHAT!!!!
If Mr. Friedman would drive through "fly-over land", he might notice the ethanol plants sprouting from the prairies.
Tom, come visit Albert Lea Minnesota. Within a short radias of this city you will find.
- Three Major Ethanol plants in production.
- One bio-dieseal plant
- Two major wind farms.
We produce enough alternative fuels to require that all gasoline sold in Minnesota contain 10% Ethanol and all diesel contain 2% bio-diesel. Even at that, we produce enough to export both ethanol and bio-diesel to other states.
Prior to the Bush Administration, the United States imported ethanol from Brazil. Now the U.S. ethanol production exceeds that of all other countries combined.
In contrast, Minnesota has enjoyed a delicious political gaffe when it was revealed last week that the Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor, Judi Dutcher, did not know what E85 was
For all those unfortunate folks living on the coasts, E85 is an 85% blend of Ethanol and is avialable at most gas stations in the area.
What an idiot!!
Going into 2006, Minnesota had scheduled to build enough wind generating capacity to provide power to over 100,000 homes........then the plans were put on hold. Apparently, a rider to a defense bill ordered all installation of new wind generators to be placed on hold pending a study on the effects of "military radar" had been assessed.
Military Radar over southern and western Minnesota?
Why?
Ted Kennedy is why. You see someone proposed building a windfarm in the Atlantic where the Kennedy's like to sail their yatchs. Ted Kennedy was so displeased at being inconvenienced that he held up all new windpower projects across the entire country
Anyone else besides farmers hear about this?
Why not?
The press loves Ted Kennedy.
Greg, are emissions standards are lower than nay other industrialized car producing economoy. The average FOrd model today has the same milegage as the original Model T. This is unacceptable. Mr. Bush would rather drill in protected lands and invade other countries before enforcing a little sensible belt-tightening in our own country.
Oh and as for Ted blocking the wind far. I HAD heard about it. And I don't like it. Greg, why do you think youi're so goddam smart for knowing the most random and useless info ever?
Since when is the development of alternative energy sources random and useless info?
It was the Bush Administration and the Republicans who transformed a non-existant Ethanol industry into the world's top producer of alternative energy. source (Please note: as of 2006, the U.S. produces more ethanol than all other nations combined.)
Thomas Friedman is grossly misinformed; obviously so are you. I guess that is the hazard of reading the NYT and listening to NPR.
(urban hicks)
Agricultural subsidies contribute to global poverty (by flooding poorer nations with cheap crops that local farmers can't compete with) and even obesity (by providing a very cheap cource of unnutricious calories in the form of corn syrup.) In fact, the only people that really stand to benefit from ethanol as an energy source are farmers.
It would be much easier to raise the fuel standards to the level they are in every other developed country. There is no reason Ford should be producing cars today that are no more efficient than the Model T. We have the technology TODAY to reduce our energy consumption and instead the Bush administration has staked its hope on future technologies while we continue to drill and fight for oil.
(rural retard)
It is popular for getting support from the midwest and that is about it.
Again...too much NYT and NPR.
Most of the data that the detractors of Ethanol use is over a decade old and does not take into account modern agricultural practices like no and low tillage or the tremendous improvements in things like dry-milling or the increase in by-products like DDG which is subsequently used for cattle and swine feed.
Christine has a point which is that Ethanol has a net energy gain of 30%, so if you put 100 units of energy into the process, you get out 130 units of energy (sunlight).
What Lauren is apparently unaware of is that the "fossil fuel" used in the Ethanol process is natural gas and very little petroleum products are used.
In effect, Ethanol efficiently converts natural gas into a liquid fuel that cars can store and burn (storage of NG is a big problem which why it is not viable).
Mr. Friedman complained that Bush was doing little about our "addiction to oil", not our addiction to natural gas.
Please try to come up to speed on these things....
....and put the UAW completely out of business?
It costs Ford and GM $2,500 in benefits for car they produce. It cost Toyota and Honda less than $110 in benefits per car. Requiring that $100's of billions be spent in redesigning engines and chasises and the subsequent retooling of plants would not only take Ford and GM close to a decade, but the expense would put their pension into bankruptcy.
Toyota and Honda are better positioned not only to retool and refit but to absorb the cost.
Now here is your choice, my little liberal friend, what do you want......high mileage cars or 500,000 working and retired UAW members without jobs, benefits, and pensions?
At least someone is thinking about these things......and the backstory is that The Democrats and Liberals with their friends in the UAW were fighting harder than Bush to resist these standards.
You know......you really need to turn off NPR and stay away from The NYT......maybe read The Economist or The Financial Times....both good English newspapers.
Greg, you arrogant fuck. Please try and refrain form being so condescending.
Bush didn't invent ethanol, and he is neglecting the much easier ways to reduce our country's dependency on oil. anyone who can actually read and isn't functionally retarded can see that is Friedman's point. anyone who can actually think would know that a president with more ties to the oil industry than the rest of the presidents in all of history combined might not be the best advocate for conservation and alternative energy sources.
natural gas is used in the fertilizers but good 'ol petroleum is still used to manufacture (heat) it. furthermore, you never addressed the economic factor. that is, ethanol isn't all that cheap if the government doesn't pump billions of dollars in subsidies in it. conservation requires zero energy input and could save the economy millions by making gas cheaper. no one in this country needs a hummer.
clearly, friedman was talking about people just like you. fortunately, the rest of america wasn't fooled on election day and voted for a democratic legislative branch to check bush's gross misuse of power.
As far as the UAW, they're not going to have any jobs if no one is BUYING their inefficient cars! hybrids are selling like crazy while GM is nearly bankrupt.
Oh and maybe it wouldn't cost them $2500 in benefits to make each car if there was some decent universal healthcare in this country like in every other industrialized nation.
I think about these jobs but honestly, they ar the ones being stupid. If they go out of business, it will be because they met the standards of shortsighted conservative president instead of the progressive needs of the AMerican people.
Excuse me?
It was the American people who chose to drive big cars. As for this president......this problem goes back to Carter, I would hardly lay it on Bush's door.
What did Clinton do about it? All of the cars on the road today were designed and tooled during the 1990's.
Do have any idea how long it takes to design, develop, tool and bring a car to market?
No, but his Administration and Republican Administrations in places like Minnesota transformed it from a curiousity into a booming business.
WHAT??? Petroleum used for HEAT in Ethanol production!!! Are you nuts?
I am sorry but I am feeling very embarrassed for you at this moment. What bothers me is that you would enter into a conversation about something you know nothing about with a person who obviously knows more than you. then wing it like that.
Lauren, you seem to be functioning on a "faith level". You seem to have this confidence that everything you feel strongly about is true. You are functioning like a Christian Fundamentalist, winging it on pure faith.
What bothers me is that you didn't even question your feelings enough to look up the subject and begin to read.
For future reference: a plant needs steam to liquefy corn starch and heat to distill alcohol. Steam is produced by burning natural gas and coal (out west) but NEVER petroleum because of economic factors. In the bad old days of ethanol production heat was used to dry the leftover distillers grains, now the grain goes to feedlots wet to save energy.
In a few years most Ethanol plants will converting over to Syngas which is produced from local products such as corn stalks, distillers grains, waste wood or other biorenewables.
-hahahahahahah you mean like being the only other person other than the recently ousted Rick Santorum to believe WMD were found in Iraq? who would have an overconfidence in that?
If you're 1/10 as smart as you think you are Greg, why don't you share with us how farm subsidies factor into making ethanol a cost-effective energy source?
Why don't you share with us why Bush hasn't enacted one means of conservation, the cheapest and easiest way to reduce our energy consumption. WHy fi Bush has doen so much for our energy crisis, our energy consumption has only increased since he's taken office and GM which won;t make hybrids has been teeting on the brink of bankruptcy while Americans scoop up hybrids faster than ever.
Bush has done nothing but drill and war to resolve our nation's energy problems. It's time we have leadership that isn't so invested in the oil industry to lead us into a future of conservation and alternative energy.
At least I didn't attempt to define WMD away in an Orwellian backflip like you did when I linked you to the Chemical Engineering News article verifying that a Sarin binary weapon was found in Iraq. A weapon that was not supposed to exist, from a program that was not supposed to exist.
You reaction was to astonishingly declare (on your personal authority) that nerve gas is not WMD.
The current economics of Ethanol do not require subsidies. The current upward trend of Ethanol production render corn subsidies obsolete and corn exports no longer necessary or economically viable in the long term.
Here is the math. The rack price of a gallon of gasoline is approx $2.17. The current corn subsidy is calculated to be $1.07 per bushel. 2.5 gallons of Ethanol are produced per bushel of corn. The rack price of Ethanol is approx. $1.30. Taking away the 47 cent subsidy leaves Ethanol selling at $1.77 which is still 50 cents less per gallon than gasoline.
Here is the problem I have with progressives.....they rarely do the math and rarely do the homework but by the vitue of their faith, The NYT and NPR they have a lock on the truth.
Uh huh, and so has the population, by about 12 million adults.
Cause...meet effect.
Hybrid sales are what 2% of total vehicle sales?
From the DFP
"You can't really have a solution without having all three at once," he said. To see just how far ethanol has to go, look at Minnesota. State officials and farming groups have been promoting ethanol since 1998. The state has 250 E85 stations with another 20 in the works, roughly a third of the national total, and the Minnesota E85 Coalition expects drivers to buy 15 million gallons of E85 this year. That will replace less than two days' worth of the average gasoline consumption by the state's drivers.
Ethanol faces different challenges in other states. In California, which accounts for more than 10% of vehicle sales, Chrysler and Ford do not sell E85-capable vehicles due to stricter emission rules. Both automakers say they will put them on sale at some point in the future, but E85 is only available to the public at one pump in San Diego.
Don Mackenzie, vehicles engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said it could take years to build up the ethanol industry enough to have a noticeable impact on oil demand.
"In the near term, we can do a lot more with fuel economy than we can with ethanol or any other biofuel," Mackenzie said. "There are limits to how quickly you can build up a new industry."
there's no point in arguing with Greg. He apparently knows everything!
From 1% to 2%? Not much overall impact on petroleum consumption.
Do not get me wrong. My next car is going to be a very high mileage diesel SmartCar, rather than a hybrid. I think conservation is great but we also have to produce.
By the way, I will be running my SmartCar on locally produced bio-diesel. Our bio-diesel plant is now in full production.
Corn Ethanol is a starter product that builds the infra-structure for Ethanol production and distribution. The big producer is going to be cellulous Ethanol. A Canadian company Logen has created an enzyme process for producing Ethanol from swithgrass that is highly viable.
We will be building a cellulous Ethanol plant locally within two years.
Ethanol is an oxegenator for fuels which results in a cleaner burn. A 10% Ethanol blend is used to meet and exceed EPA Clean Air Requirements.
You also missed the boat on a number of other things. Ethanol replaces gasoline, so a 10% blend across the country means that a 10% reduction in foreign imports.
Our Republican governor and Republican House has required that all gasoline sold in Minnesota contain a 10% Ethanol blend.
Our Republican governor and Republican House has required that all diesel sold in Minnesota contain a 2% bio-diesel blend.
Nine other state mandate a 10% Ethanol blend and more are coming on line as the distribution network branches out to them.
an excellent article on how Buish failed to keep his pledge to explore alternative energy.