home

On Being a Better 'Conserver'

By TChris, Section Huricanes Katrina and Rita
Posted on Tue Sep 27, 2005 at 09:04:16 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

A president who jets to the gulf coast seven times in search of photo ops should expect to be lampooned when he urges Americans to be better “conservers” by avoiding unnecessary trips. President Bush has taken heat on Air America all day for promising that federal employees will avoid wasteful travel, all the while traveling on Air Force One for no useful purpose. Dan Froomkin joins the fun:

Bush, who is not known for his strict adherence to grammar when speaking extemporaneously, was unusually unquotable yesterday. Here's a topic Bush knows a lot about: Oil. But his remarks were full of fragment sentences, as well as small-bore statistics and industry lingo.

Jon Stewart ran a clip tonight of former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer brushing off a question about conservation by assuring the audience that the president believes energy consumption is “an American way of life.” Froomkin picks up on the Fleischer briefing, and quotes Dick Cheney’s 2001 pronouncement that conservation “cannot be the basis of a sound energy policy.” He also rounds up some blogger takes on the president’s born-again desire to preach conservation.

Update (TL): Ari Emanuel adds his thoughts on Huffpo:

if the president is serious about this leadership thing, he's got to go all the way. It's not enough to ask us to conserve; he also needs to be willing to upset his pals in the oil and car industries by demanding that fuel-efficiency standards be raised. (The energy bill he signed in August once again failed to increase mileage standards for passenger cars.) Doing so would result in the greatest conservation of fuel achievable with a single legislative act. Increasing mileage standards for SUVs and light trucks by just one mile per gallon a year for five years would save America one million barrels of oil a day by 2020.

So what do you say, Mr. President -- how about showing true leadership by taking your newfound commitment to conservation all the way?

< It's Not a Game: Blame Rumsfeld | New Report on Denying Benefits to Drug Offenders >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    On Being a Better 'Conserver' | 17 comments (17 topical)
    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    Talking point a month ago: "Bush is still on vacation??? Why doesn't he fly back to DC, and down to see the disaster for himself?" This month's talking point: "Why is he wasting so much fuel and getting in the way of recovery efforts?" TChris - make up your mind. If that's possible.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#2)
    by Darryl Pearce on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    The reason is because Dubya can't do anything right. He slacks when he should pay attention and he pays attention when he shoud slack. He releases the law when it suits his backers and he enforces the law when it suits his backers. Who could those backers be?

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    James, the obvious fact is that his GAME is gone. He may well be drinking -- there's evidence he has used cocaine (the zipper performance in Peru), and we know he is on psychiatric meds since last year. So your fake talking point attempt to discredit the observers is just more of that 'me or your damn eyes' crapola that no longer works with 70% of us. The clear evidence is that his DRUG ABUSE, combined with his already minimal mental habits (note, I'm not saying intelligence) is cutting into his public performance. You would be hard-pressed to find another President who has been as untruthful and played as many nasty, unsupported bait and switch moves as this guy Bush. He has flimflamed his way into a princehood -- and a lot of people are seeing red about how he is hogging the wealth and hurting as many families as he can, though simple (or sarcastic) NEGLECT. People have seen through him in large numbers, and that is of great importance to his political career, as opposed to his career as a traitor and a tyrant and toady for his backers. His political career is in tatters. He's an embarassment, and even Fred Barnes wonders why he has worked very hard, it seems, to discredit every tenet of conservatism. And the reason why? Because that's the kind of con artist he is -- the kind who destroys even his supporters. No loyalty outside his immediate circles. You lot thought that he was going in your direction, but in fact he was taking you AND US over a cliff that happens to be on the road toward your worldview. It was easy to use you to force himself on the republic. Thanks, James.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:23 PM EST
    Typical wrong winger BS from both JR and the preznit. Yes JR, we harped on him for not flying to NOLA right away, and yes we will harp on him for flying when he tells us not to. (Even Carter told us to wear a sweater while wearing a sweater!) Simple enough for the black and white crowd?

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:24 PM EST
    Yep, that's the way to victory - TChris is out desperately looking for a talking point that will work (I expect he'll work "The Draft" into this somehow). Meanwhile, all Paul and Johnny can think of is tossing baseless accusations (The Enquirer as a source?) and namecalling. Yah, that's the road to victory in 2006. Pardon me while I don't exactly tremble in my boots. Oh, and having Rangel compare Bush to Bull Connor - and having the DNC not repudiate that - doesn't help either. Mindlessly tossing the race card doesn't play well in middle America either.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#6)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:24 PM EST
    PIL - More claims with no proof. Let's see some or we'll just put'em down to more baseless rants.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:24 PM EST
    Did I name call? Did I make a baseless accusation? NO Spare me your indignant rant JR. race card? I see... You misinterpretated my black and white statement... In computer terms, I would use a statement like "Simple enough for you 1's and 0's crowd?" Or "The light is either On or Off" Or "The ladder is either up or down" It is an allusion to people who do not see that the world is composed of grey tones, not black and white...

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:24 PM EST
    His speech does seem to be getting worse lately. It could be stress, but I wouldn't rule out booze. Once an addict, always an addict.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:24 PM EST
    And the president is only paying $1.57 per gallon..what's that about. And Leslie Blitzer the fool for Bush tried to defend it by saying compared to the other money being spent it looked like a bargain Bush is incompetent and now the Reepers are desparate. The media takes its usual head of its a-- position and tries to pretend over hald the nation hadn't noticed pre hurricane that the Republicans who are totally in charge are grossly incompetent at every level of government. The Feds sucked up every available dollar for "Homeland Security" and then slowly began to to release dollars back to first responders. The GOP and this president are the worst administration this country has ever seen because they operate in the interest of only one group of citizens rich white Republicans and they don't give a crap about anyone else and they will use any tool and any lie to achieve their goals.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    Sideshow Paul in LA -- do you honestly believe, in the bottom of your heart (if you have one??), that President Bush is a "DRUG ADDICT" as you stated? Come on -- are you inable to participate in any form of mature, reality based discussion? Personally, if President Bush pulled off first term, then won re-election, all the while a frothing-at-the-mouth drug addict, I'm impressed...

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    I honestly don't see the point of repeated visits to the destroyed city. I only needed to see the damage once to know something needed to be done. Seems wasteful to fly down 7 times for something that he could have received status reports about from where he was staying.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    But Snowy Mountain Princess -- if Bush only visited the devastated city once, your post would have read something to the effect of "Bush doesn't care about black people or New Orleans as he is too busy orchestrating the killing of innocent Iraqis in Washington to take in the reality of the devastation. Death to the neocon, etc, etc, etc." Really -- what is the position of those of you against Bush using Airforce 1? Should we ground the most influential and powerful man in the world in an effort to conserve? Or, instead, as Bush stated, should we, as the collective citizens of America, take the responsibility upon ourselves to conserve energy, as it is the combined efforts of many, not the extra-ordinary efforts of one, that will make a difference. And hogwash on anyone who thinks they have an inkling of insight into reason for any single excursion of the President of the United States. Just too ignorant a point of view to comment on further.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    Posted by Jim: "PIL - More claims with no proof. Let's see some or we'll just put'em down to more baseless rants." Actually, not. The photo of Bush with his zipper down and his underwear sticking out the zipper was seen by THE ENTIRE LITERATE WORLD, and especially the people south of our border. It was an AP photo, distributed on Yahoo! Seen by millions of people, but apparently not you, Jim. "The clear evidence is that his DRUG ABUSE," Posted by hannityiscrazy: "do you honestly believe, in the bottom of your heart (if you have one??), that President Bush is a "DRUG ADDICT" as you stated" Didn't state he was a drug addict. I said his DRUG ABUSE, as you can see from the quote. He has ADMITTED his drug abuse. It is clear from his record that he drank to excess, took both marijuana and cocaine, for at least two decades. Do you really think that doesn't have an impact? I didn't think so. "if President Bush pulled off first term, then won re-election," He did not win re-election, or election ever. He stole the election, and we caught YOU LOT doing it, so shut up with the lies.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    Sideshow Paul in LA -- Your "evidence" for Bush's "drug abuse" is a picture of him with his fly down? Either you are a pervert, or you, as usual, are spouting off hot air and lucky charms.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:25 PM EST
    Oh yea SideShow (Paul in LA): my whole quote was: "Personally, if President Bush pulled off first term, then won re-election, all the while a frothing-at-the-mouth drug addict, I'm impressed..." You left off the end of my quote, which I personally enjoy due to my neocon narcissism. "Stole the election"? "Shut up with your lies"? Are you a 9-year-old that accidentally got onto this blog????

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:26 PM EST
    Posted by hannityiscrazy: "Sideshow Paul in LA -- Your "evidence" for Bush's "drug abuse" is a picture of him with his fly down?" No, that's evidence of HIS COCAINE USE. It is also the first time in US history that a president has gone out for a PHOTO-OP with his underwear sticking several inches out his open zipper. Do you consider that an accident? How come his minders didn't mind? Or didn't he mind his minders? If that happened in Omaha, I'd wonder if he was drinking. But in Peru, with a former-cocaine user, it is a clearcut sign of COCAINE use. His grin at his antics is pure cokehead behavior, and I saw quite a bit of it when I worked in Hollywood back in the 80s. Once you've dealt with a cokehead, it's hard to forget the stupid grins and 'funny' zipper tricks. "Either you are a pervert, or you, as usual, are spouting off hot air and lucky charms." No, you're just a liar and a toady. Posted by hannityiscrazy: "all the while a frothing-at-the-mouth drug addict" Since I didn't say he was a drug addict, you are just reviewing your own flatus. I'm waiting to hear from you, after a year, what happened in Peru. Or why that photograph is no longer available anywhere on the Internet. But since you are a winger troll, you really don't care whether Bush offended everyone south of our borders. You actually think that such behavior is acceptable in a president, when in fact it is IMPEACHABLE; a violation of diplomacy on top of his other violations, each of which is not funny, but rather a tragedy in the making.

    Re: On Being a Better 'Conserver' (none / 0) (#17)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:27 PM EST
    tossing baseless accusations (The Enquirer as a source?)
    Hey, when was the last time a pretzel kicked your ass??

    On Being a Better 'Conserver' | 17 comments (17 topical)