Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CNN: "We Were Warned." the oil crisis. tonight at 8PM EDT

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:42 PM
Original message
CNN: "We Were Warned." the oil crisis. tonight at 8PM EDT
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 05:28 PM by Gabi Hayes
they did a tease for it, WRT Brazil's coming energy independence

too bad that horrible, bad president Carter didn't try to do anything about it during his term; it's all HIS fault.

WAIT a minute....he did! it was the centerpiece of his legislative agenda

too bad the DEMOCRATS in congress help keep his plans from ever going into effect

the pugs, of course, were totally against it, but the powers that be controlled enough Dems, who had substantial house and senate majorities (61-39), and thus had no trouble thwarting his proposed energy policies:

In other collusion, when the National Energy Plan, the centerpiece of Carter's legislative proposals, finally reached the conference stage, a new deadlock machine was created:


Normally, each House appoints as conferees only supporters of its bill, but this conference ... is founded on quite different principles.... The Speaker has called deregulation "totally unacceptable," but of the twenty-six legislators he names to the conference, thirteen favor deregulation. Jackson adamantly opposes deregulation, but the Senate's conferees are none other than the eighteen exquisitely divided members of his committee .... And what does this forty-four man, flesh-and-blood machine produce with remarkable clockwork efficiency? Ironclad, unbreakable deadlock, day after day, week after week, month after month.... will remain 9-9 until next August 18, when they all agree to — deregulation, just what Carter opposed. (LUS, pp. 71-72)

http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/anyday_2b.htm


lots more at the link, which borrows heavily from Walter Karp's indispensable "Liberty Under Siege"

more here, WRT the savaging of Carter by his own party, the Washington elite, and, surprise, the liberal Media!
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/anyday_3.htm

still more, which gives a shortened version of just how BADLY Carter was screwed by his own party, and the media, from day one of his presidency


http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/anyday_2.htm
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/anyday_4.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. America was warned by Jimmy Carter in 1977.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. exactly my point, and I should have made it more explicitly
CAFE standards originated with him, and it was his expresseed plan to make the US energy independent! what a concept, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. here's Carter's ten point energy plan.....ready to get FURIOUS?
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 04:50 PM by Gabi Hayes
That is the concept of the energy policy we will present on Wednesday. Our national energy plan is based on ten fundamental principles.

The first principle is that we can have an effective and comprehensive energy policy only if the government takes responsibility for it and if the people understand the seriousness of the challenge and are willing to make sacrifices.

The second principle is that healthy economic growth must continue. Only by saving energy can we maintain our standard of living and keep our people at work. An effective conservation program will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

The third principle is that we must protect the environment. Our energy problems have the same cause as our environmental problems -- wasteful use of resources. Conservation helps us solve both at once.

The fourth principle is that we must reduce our vulnerability to potentially devastating embargoes. We can protect ourselves from uncertain supplies by reducing our demand for oil, making the most of our abundant resources such as coal, and developing a strategic petroleum reserve.

The fifth principle is that we must be fair. Our solutions must ask equal sacrifices from every region, every class of people, every interest group. Industry will have to do its part to conserve, just as the consumers will. The energy producers deserve fair treatment, but we will not let the oil companies profiteer.

The sixth principle, and the cornerstone of our policy, is to reduce the demand through conservation. Our emphasis on conservation is a clear difference between this plan and others which merely encouraged crash production efforts. Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy. Conservation is the only way we can buy a barrel of oil for a few dollars. It costs about $13 to waste it.

The seventh principle is that prices should generally reflect the true replacement costs of energy. We are only cheating ourselves if we make energy artificially cheap and use more than we can really afford.

The eighth principle is that government policies must be predictable and certain. Both consumers and producers need policies they can count on so they can plan ahead. This is one reason I am working with the Congress to create a new Department of Energy, to replace more than 50 different agencies that now have some control over energy.

The ninth principle is that we must conserve the fuels that are scarcest and make the most of those that are more plentiful. We can't continue to use oil and gas for 75 percent of our consumption when they make up seven percent of our domestic reserves. We need to shift to plentiful coal while taking care to protect the environment, and to apply stricter safety standards to nuclear energy.

The tenth principle is that we must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century.

These ten principles have guided the development of the policy I would describe to you and the Congress on Wednesday.

Our energy plan will also include a number of specific goals, to measure our progress toward a stable energy system.

These are the goals we set for 1985:

--Reduce the annual growth rate in our energy demand to less than two percent.

--Reduce gasoline consumption by ten percent below its current level.

--Cut in half the portion of United States oil which is imported, from a potential level of 16 million barrels to six million barrels a day.

--Establish a strategic petroleum reserve of one billion barrels, more than six months' supply.

--Increase our coal production by about two thirds to more than 1 billion tons a year.

--Insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings.

--Use solar energy in more than two and one-half million houses.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_energy.html

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

and what sort of progress have we made in acheiving these goals?

don't make me laugh/vomit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
8.  "These are the goals we set for 1985."
That was 21 years ago. Much could have been done by now.

I always think of Carter wearing sweaters. As soon as Reagan took office, it was as though the need to conserve never existed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. and, in a most disgustingly symbolic moment for that senile prick's regim
....he had the solar panels installed by Carter removed from the WH roof
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Conservation be damned.
The change was shockingly abrupt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thom Hartmann, today, on Carter's UNADOPTED energy plan
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 04:54 PM by Gabi Hayes
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0503-22.htm

In his recent news conference, George Bush Jr. suggested that our nation's "problem" with high gasoline prices was caused by the lack of a national energy policy, and tried to blame it all on Bill Clinton. First, Junior said, "This is a problem that's been a long time in coming. We haven't had an energy policy in this country." This was followed by, "That's exactly what I've been saying to the American people -- 10 years ago if we'd had an energy strategy, we would be able to diversify away from foreign dependence. And -- but we haven't done that. And now we find ourselves in the fix we're in." As is so often the case, Bush was lying.

Consider President Jimmy Carter's April 18, 1977 speech. Since it was given nearly three decades ago, when many of the reporters in Bush's White House were children, it's understandable that they don't remember it. But it's inexcusable that Bush and the mainstream media (which, after all, has the ability to do research) would completely ignore it. It was the speech that established the strategic petroleum reserve, birthed the modern solar power industry, led to the insulation of millions of American homes, and established America's first national energy policy. "With the exception of preventing war," said Jimmy Carter, a man of peace, "this is the greatest challenge our country will face during our lifetimes."

He added: "It is a problem we will not solve in the next few years, and it is likely to get progressively worse through the rest of this century. "We must not be selfish or timid if we hope to have a decent world for our children and grandchildren.

"We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us." Carter bluntly pointed out that: "The most important thing about these proposals is that the alternative may be a national catastrophe. Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation." He called the new energy policy he was proposing, "he 'moral equivalent of war' -- except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not destroy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Carter's entire speech
http://www.mnforsustain.org/energy_speech_president_carter.htm


just think what might have been; the lives saved in the Middle East, just for starters (and I don't just mean our invading troops, btw)

maybe the earth would have a chance to heal, too

thing is, the earth is going to be here, but how will its face change as a result of what the insatiable greedheads have been doing since we established the oil economy and have relentlessly befouled our nest for the last hundred-plus years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pstans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks for the reminder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. care to guess whether ANY of this will be discussed on the CNN show?
Edited on Sun Apr-23-06 05:29 PM by Gabi Hayes
more from Hartmann, and this piece is right on target for what's happening now. too bad nobody paid ANY attention to Carter when this was happening

wonder why:

Carter's speech drew a strong reaction from the Saudis and the oil industry. Think tanks soon emerged - many whose names are today familiar - to suggest there was really no energy problem, and they led the charge to establish a permanent right-wing media in the US. Within two years, Saudi citizen and oil baron Salem bin Laden's sole US representative, James Bath, would funnel cash into the failing business of the son of the CIA's former director, political up-and-comer George H. W. Bush. With that money from the representative of Osama Bin Laden's half-brother, George Bush Jr. was able to keep afloat his Arbusto ("shrub" in Spanish) Oil Company. And he would be in the pocket of the bin Laden and Saudi interests for the rest of his life. But Carter was incorruptible.


"We can be sure that all the special interest groups in the country will attack the part of this plan that affects them directly," he said. "They will say that sacrifice is fine, as long as other people do it, but that their sacrifice is unreasonable, or unfair, or harmful to the country.* If they succeed, then the burden on the ordinary citizen, who is not organized into an interest group, would be crushing." But that would be wrong. It would be un-American. It would lead to future oil shocks, and the probable death of American soldiers in Middle Eastern oil wars. Instead of caving in to the Saudis and the oil industry, Carter said: "There should be only one test for this program: whether it will help our country."

*"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis all by itself for sound, comprehensive energy policy.''-- guess who said that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MazeRat7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
11. Yup, everyday I am amazed at how little weight we give past history.
Silly me, but that whole "lessons learned" concept has saved my personal butt more times than I care to admit. You would think I would not be alone in that respect, but apparently I am.

Thanks for the reminder of where we were then.

MZr7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. why don't the dems make a form of this speech a cornerstone of their
own energy plank?

Carter seems to be held in pretty high esteem these days, and I would think it'd be SMART POLITICS to dredge this up (sans their own role in sinking the plan, of course), with him getting public exposure in doing so.

they can REMIND the sheeple that a democratic president had a conservation/alternative fuel program at the top of his agenda almost THIRTY YEARS AGO!

and the pugs made FUN of it druing this very regime
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
13. show starts now....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
14. oh....this is a speculative piece I heard a few days ago.....Al Qaeda
attacks, destroying Saudi oil fields

the world descends into chaos

I stopped listening the first time I heard it

Syriana, anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. Frank Sesno interviewing Woolsey, former WJC CIA chief
anybody else not trust that guy?

he is an energy independence advocate, give him that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporate_mike Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. People should buy hybrid cars or diesels than run on E85
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
17. Gallup poll: gas prices THIRD in national importance, as reported
by Olbermann\

Iraq 25%
Immigration 19%

gas prices are now at 11% as most important thing on peoples' minds



what I'd like to know is where gas prices have ranked over the last few years, and how they got so high in public consciousness so fast

the only two subjects ranking above:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
18. again, this is the answer to the scumbags like Susan Molinari, and, yes,
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 07:46 PM by Gabi Hayes
David Gregory, who assert that the dems have/had no plan for energy independence

Gregory was absolutely disgusting in his pandering to the WH tonight, going so far as to say the president has nothing to do about gas prices in the short run, then LYING about Clinton doing nothing (casting it in blame-casting terms) when prices went up on his watch

thanks to ramboliberal on another thread for this:

....he sent his energy secretary

to jawbone OPEC countries. And he provided money for poor suffering from "high energy prices" of a whole $30 a barrel - hell we'd be if it was that price now.

<snip>

At a news conference Wednesday, President Clinton announced that he had released $125 million in federal funds to help poor families pay energy bills.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: In the Northeast the impact has been particularly harsh because from the mid-Atlantic states to New England, many families still rely on home heating oil-- a source of heating no longer used in the rest of the country. These families have been especially hard-hit. That is a serious concern, especially because the winter months have been colder this year than in the past few years

GWEN IFILL: Energy Secretary Bill Richardson admitted today the spike in oil prices caught the administration off guard.

BILL RICHARDSON: Everybody was caught napping. Nobody predicted what would happen. But it's not that we didn't have a response. We have a response, but at the same time we don't intervene, the government doesn't intervene in fuel prices and in oil markets.

GWEN IFILL: President Clinton has dispatched Richardson to meet with the leaders of oil- producing nations Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/economy/jan-june00/oil_2...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 06:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC