Shots Across the Bow

Last Night, Gov. Palin claimed that Barack Obama had done nothing significant while in the US Senate. I have echoed that statement.

I was wrong.

* The Lugar-Obama Non-Proliferation Act
This law, authored by Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Barack Obama was passed in 2006 and signed in 2007. In the words of its authors, this is what it does:

These vast numbers of unused conventional weapons, particularly shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles that can hit civilian airliners, pose a major security risk to America and democracies everywhere. That’s why we have introduced legislation to seek out and destroy surplus and unguarded stocks of conventional arms in Asia, Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East.

Our bill would launch a major nonproliferation initiative by addressing the growing threat from unsecured conventional weapons and by bolstering a key line of defense against weapons of mass destruction. Modeled after the successful Nunn-Lugar program to dismantle former Soviet nuclear weapons, the Lugar-Obama bill would seek to build cooperative relationships with willing countries.

By all accounts, it’s been pretty successful so far.

* The Coburn-Obama Transparency Act
This law (which John McCain co-sponsored) was the work of Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Barack Obama. It provides that all federal contracts be made transparent and available online to the public. A nice bit of sunshine into a shadowy world. You can see the results here at http://www.usaspending.gov/.

* Relief for the Democratic Republic of Congo
Authored, sponsored and introduced by Barack Obama, this legislation provided increased foreign aid and relief to the country, and directed the U.N. Ambassador to press the U.N. Security Council for stronger peacekeeping forces in the region.

Republicans do themselves no favors when they exaggerate and embellish to make a point because just like the Democrats, they get caught and and then have to backtrack. This is exactly the kind of thing I said I wouldn't stand for, and that's why I'm posting it here. I know this will come as a foreign concept to politicos on both sides but try telling the truth for a change.

Gov. Sarah Palin showed she's not just some "random fundamentalist wingnut" (Is this really the best the left can come up with? Turning a blind eye to all of the strengths that Palin brings to the ticket, not to mention her actual experience as a chief executive? Sad.) that John McCain pulled out of a hat. Instead, she showed a shrewd ability to play to the crowd, and a deft touch with defusing some potentially explosive issues. She also showed that as VP, she will perform much like any Navy second in command. Like any good Executive Officer, the Naval equivalent to the VP, she will be the Captain's enforcer, working to see that his agenda is moved forward.

She has the strength and the tenacity to get the job done.

But what impressed me more was her political acumen. If I had been up there, I would have ripped the press a new one for what they've done over the past few days. But Gov. Palin is classier than that. Instead of nailing their worthless hides to the wall, instead of cowering in fear and trying to hide her family, she brought them all up there with her. It was a very classy way for her to say "In your face!" to all those who tried to embarrass and humiliate her by dragging her family through the mud. By bringing them on the stage she said, "Yeah, my family isn't perfect. We have all made mistakes, and we'll make more. But I'll never be ashamed of them and I'll never dishonor them by caving in to your political mudslinging. We stand before you as a family and we'll let America decide who the real slimeballs are.

However, for Russ, and all the others who want to keep proclaiming that Gov. Palin is just a nobody, or for the sexist pigs/sows who want to say she's just a vagina, I say keep it up guys. Keep underestimating her. Keep trying to belittle her. But when November rolls around and you find yourself wondering how you could have possibly lost again, don't blame Diebold. Blame yourself.

Victor Agreda Jr vagredajr In summary: if you elect the other guy the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man will kill us all. WOLVERIIIIINES!

Victor Agreda Jr vagredajr I have a record too. "Eddie Murphy: Comedian" & it has all the answers.

Victor Agreda Jr vagredajr OK, I get it Obama's plans are all terrible. WTF IS YOUR PLAN? So far I hear a lot of "they suck" not "here's how we are better." Turnips.

Jason Egan jasonegan But what can she do for special needs famalies as VP? Wrong to fish for those votes in that way.

Jason Egan jasonegan Leveraging her son again for the camera. Don't slam people for talking about your family if you're going to use them for political gain.

Jason Egan jasonegan Wow, Palin just whored out her entire family for votes.

Let's take the last couple of comments first. You see, this is what I was talking about when I said that much of what the rabid lefties say has no bearing on reality. In Jason's mind, the smears against Palin's family took place is some weird sort of time warp where they occurred after she put her family on the stage, even though in real time the attacks came three days before she spoke.

Wow.

Of course, a simpler explanation, one that doesn't require bending the fabric of time and space, is that Palin brought her family up on stage as a classy way to rebuke the slime merchants who tried to make her ashamed of her family.

Imagine that.

Incidentally, another reason I led off with this is it demonstrates a meme running around in the media over the last couple of days. Anytime you hear a journalist, reporter, columnist, or pundit question Palin's commitment to her family for putting them through the excruciating hell of the media spotlight, remember exactly who is holding that spotlight. That's right, the same bastards who are asking the question. It's quite the protection racket when you think about it.

"If you run for office as a conservative, we will rip your life to shreds looking for dirt. And not only that, we'll rip your family's life to shreds as well. And if we don't find anything good, we'll condemn you for putting your family through that process."

Since when did the media become political gatekeepers? I applaud Gov. Palin and even more so her family, for having the courage to stand up to the media meat grinder and bring down the unaccountable gatekeepers of politics.

And Jason, VPs traditionally have a wide degree of latitude to pick special projects and champion their own causes. Remember Al Gore and his wheelbarrow full of government regulations he cut?

Victor's comments show again that people hear only what they want to hear. There was a lot of meat in Palin's speech. Drilling for oil. Energy independence. Strong national defense. Reducing waste and corruption. I particularly liked the analysis of Russia and Georgia, what the stakes were, and what the motivations were. She placed it into a geopolitical context, outside of "The Russians are resurrecting the Soviet Union," something no news agency I've listened to even attempted. That segment alone demonstrated how much stronger the McCain Palin team is than the O' Biden ticket. After listening to her for forty minutes, I have a good idea of what her priorities are, and how she compliments the McCain ticket.

But then again, I wasn't typing snarky posts during the speech; I was listening.

Rudy Giuliani

He worked as a community organizer......What?

Nearly 130 times, he couldn't make a decision. He couldn't figure out whether to vote "Yes" or "No." It was too tough! He voted....he voted "Present!" (Giuliani is channeling George Carlin here, a fact that would mightily piss off Carlin.)

For President of the United States, it's not good enough to be "Present." You have to make a decision.

Change is not a destination just as hope is not a strategy.

In the single biggest question in this election, Sen.McCain got it right and Barack Obama got it wrong.

I'll tell ya, if I were Joe Biden, I'd want to get that VP thing in writing.

He suggested the UN Security council could find a solution. Apparently none of his 300 foreign policy security advisors knew that Russia had a veto in the Security Council.

I have some advice for Sen. Obama. Next time, call John McCain.

Gov. Sarah Palin

What's the difference between Hockey Moms and pitbulls? Lipstick

Let me explain to them what the job (mayor) involves. I guess a small town mayor is sort of like a community organizer except that you have actual responsibilities.

We prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another in Sacramento.

Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reason...the right reason is to challenge the status quo, to serve the common good, and to leave this nation better than when we found it.

The luxury jet was over the top. I put it on Ebay. (I can hear Pelosi's veins bulging from here.)

The fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all. (Pelosi takes it on the chin again!)

This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word victory except when he's talking about his own campaign.

Victory in Iraq is within sight and he wants to forfeit.

In politics there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those like John McCain who use their careers to promote change.

They are the ones whose names are found on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners or on self designed presidential seals.

The American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of self discovery.

For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words. For a life time, John McCain will inspire with his actions.

Candidate D	Candidate R
Married a charismatic young law student	Married a fisherman and raised a family
Stayed married to a womanizing lawyer	Joined the PTA and raised a family
Stayed married to a womanizing governor	Ran for City Council and won while raising a family
Stayed married to a womanizing president	Ran for mayor and won while raising a family
Stayed married to a womanizing ex president and ran for Senate in a state she wasn't from.	Ran for governor and won while raising a family
Tried to enact sweeping reform on health care and failed miserably	Cleaned up corruption in her state government, while raising a family
Baked cookies once to prove she could	Hunts, kills, and field dresses a moose to feed her family

That's a toughie...

The last time I heard of a young man advancing so far so fast with such a light record of accomplishment, Jayson Blair was being fired from the New York Times for making stuff up.

You blew it!

I tried to walk away from it, tried to leave it alone. I was sick of the lies and distortion, sick of the brutality.

But I'm back in it with a vengeance, and folks, it won't be pretty.

I got back from taking my son to school this morning and saw Meredith Viera and some other Democrat talking head on one of the morning shows talking earnestly about how Sarah Palin was showing poor judgment and acting irresponsibly by putting her family under the severe spotlight and scrutiny of the press by accepting the nomination.

First of all, I haven't seen this much hypocrisy from the feminist left since the Clinton impeachment. Have they lost their minds? They are saying that Sarah Palin's place is in the home; apparently feminism only applies to women of the appropriate political persuasion. I'm happy to say that here in Tennessee, at least some women of both parties have pointed out the nastiness and the sexist nature of the attacks on Gov. Palin.

Other women, well, not so much.

Maybe it's because I was raised in the South. Maybe it's because I'm a believer in truth and reality,not distortions and lies. Maybe it's because my momma raised me better. But for whatever the reason, I cannot stand by while a lady is attacked by liars, while her family is ravaged by folks who just make stuff up out of whole cloth, then erase it like it never happened, without even the grace to apologize, while her judgment and ability to raise her family is questioned by folks who wouldn't bat an eyelash at her choices if there was a D after her name.

When I left the house this morning, I wasn't going to write about politics anymore. When I left the house this morning, I wasn't going to vote for McCain; I was going to vote for a third party candidate or a write in. When I left the house this morning, I wasn't angry anymore.

So much for that.

Here's what all of you on the left who have behaved so abominably over the last three days have accomplished.

I'm pissed off and I'm back in it. I'm voting for McCain/Palin. Not because I like McCain. I don't. But you folks are not qualified to run a Chucky Cheese restaurant, much less a country. You are vile, disgusting creatures without a hint of a clue about how the real world operates. If you had such a clue, you wouldn't have done the things you did and said the things you did. You would have understood that the religious right, far from crucifying young Bristol for her actions, would reward and cherish her for the way she's dealing with the consequences. Rather than attacking Gov. Palin for having the temerity to be a governor and a mother, you would have acknowledged her accomplishments, as did Hillary Clinton,and Barack Obama himself.

Instead you did what you did, or stood by and nodded wisely,and that makes you just as bad as Kos, Sullivan, Combs, Olbermann, and the rest of them.

But it gets worse for you. Yeah, you've energized me to vote. But I'm only one vote, right? That won't make much of a difference. Except it's not just one vote. How many other folks do you think are out there thinking just like me? How many other folks are sickened by this display of partisanship run amok? How many other moderates, or independents, or libertarians do you think you just pissed off enough to vote against Obama just because of your ugliness? I'm betting that this whole ugly episode has galvanized tens of thousands of moderates to vote against your ordained candidate.

You're right about one thing. I'm just one vote,and one voice. But you can bet that over the next several week, I'll be fact checking your asses on every post, every news article, every website. I'm going through Obama's web page and analyzing every one of his plans, every one of his policies, and we'll see exactly how bad an Obama presidency would be for the United States. I'll do everything I can to make sure that every weakness, every ambiguity, every deception, every evasion, every misstep of the Obama campaign is documented and remains easily accessible during the rest of the campaign.

And you are welcome to come here and fact check my ass, because buddy, if I make a mistake, I want to know about it. If you know something I don'tknow, I want to learn it. And if you come with a substantive argument, you will be engaged with respect. But you'd better come prepared with the facts because I will respectfully hand you your ass if you don't.

And you haters and trolls, you're welcome as well. Your mudslinging, your name calling, your hatred, and your sick twisted minds will serve as evidence to all sane people that you can't be trusted with any more power than you already have.

Those of you who have already made up your minds that liberal=good and conservative=bad are excused from the conversation. You see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear, and it rarely has any relationship to the real world. I'm not going to waste any effort in opening your eyes. There's a reason Democrats chose the jackass as their party symbol.

And final note to conservatives who may wander by. Don't you sink to the level of the scum or I'll call you out as well. Critique Obama's policies; critique his qualifications; critique his experience; critique his judgment; critique his actions; these are all fair game. Leave his family and his personal life out of it. Same goes for Biden. No accusations without a basis in fact will be tolerated. No character assassination will be allowed. If you have a question about his character, you'd better have some hard evidence to back it up. These are the rules. I'm not feeling particularly civil towards certain parts of the progressive movement at this particular time, but I refuse to sink to that level of discourse.

• Before the game, Rick Neuheisel said he was hoping to keep the game close until the 4th, and then get some home cooking. He got his wish as the refs blew two major calls that may have made the difference in the game. The safety was a safety by the rules of the NCAA because all of the ball was not clear of the endzone. The second missed call was pass with the entire offensive line 5 yards up field. This in no way excuses the Vols lack of ability Monday night.


• Rereading my post from last night, I realized it could be summed up in one point. UT was not ready to play on the opening day of the season, and this is becoming a regular occurrence at Tennessee. That goes directly to coaching.


• Once again, we failed to make appropriate adjustments at half time. Again, that goes directly to coaching.


• Looking at the upcoming schedule, the Vols could easily go 2-4 to start the season.

I'll bet I can get pretty cheap tickets to the UAB game if I wanted them. Fortunately, I'll be announcing English Mountain Conference football and can skip the next Vol debacle.

But this is too funny not to link

The Vols opened their 2008 season Monday night, losing to UCLA in overtime 27-24, and although the result wasn't the blowout loss they had last year against Cal, the game highlighted that the Vols still have a lot of work to do before being consider as contenders for, well anything. While the defense performed well for most of the game, the offense never found a rhythm, special team play was inconsistent, and once again, as Vol fans have become accustomed to, UT was outcoached in the second half.

An ineffective passing offense and inconsistent play from the special teams dominated the first quarter of the game. Jonathan Crompton started off passing the ball well but then started missing open receivers, sending the ball high and hot. Meanwhile the defense played soft, and relied on the inexperience of third string quarterback Kevin Craft, picking him off twice in the period. The only scoring in the quarter came via the Bruins special teams, which returned a blocked Cunningham punt for a Bruin touchdown. Ayers came unblocked into the backfield blocking the punt, and Ryan Graves scooped it up and carried it into the end zone.

The second quarter opened with a Tennessee drive for a touchdown, a drive that highlighted the schizophrenic nature of this Volunteer football team. There were some good running efforts from Montario Hardesty and a 42 yard completion from Crompton to Briscoe, but there were also three false start penalties on the offense, including one by quarterback Crompton. Throughout the game, Tennessee amassed 8 penalties, often in key situations, while the Bruins were penalized twice. Tennessee took the lead on a 62 yard interception and touchdown by Nevin McKenzie, Craft's 4th interception of the half.

The second half started with more of the same. UT started strong, kicking off into the end zone, and then the defense held the Bruins to 3 and out. But then the Mr. Hyde of UT football, AKA the offense, came out to play. First, Rogan almost muffed the punt, and UT started on their own 21 yard line. Then after a solid UT drive to the Bruin 6, Foster lost the handle on the ball before being hit and gave it to UCLA. UCLA mounted a couple of drives, including one good enough for a field goal, cutting the Vol lead to 4. The Tennessee offense never got into a rhythm in the third quarter racking up one fumble and two punts in three possessions.

In the fourth quarter, UCLA came to life. It started with UCLA backed up on their own 3 yard line after a beautiful punt by Cunningham. After a questionable call, the ball was spotted at the 1 foot line, and then UT jumped offsides, allowing the Bruins out of the trap. The defense held and the Bruins punted into a gorgeous return by Gerald Jones, who brought the ball from the Vol 40 to the UCLA 26. Unfortunately, once again the offense took over from there. One bad pass and sack later, and Fulmer elected to go for a 50+ yard field goal for the third time in the game. A penalty for delay of game cancelled the attempt and Fulmer wisely elected to punt.

And UCLA wisely decided to go with a short yardage, high percentage offence designed to protect their shaky quarterback. Craft went 6 for 6 and the UCLA took the lead after a 3 yard run by Carter scored the go ahead touchdown.

On UT's next possession, the offensive line began to break down, allowing the Bruins to pressure Crompton, who didn't handle the pressure well. On five straight plays there were Bruins in the Big Orange backfield almost as quickly as the ball got there. Then, after a UT time out, Crompton scrambled for 10 yards, coming up one yard shy of the first down. Without any other option, Fulmer made the call to go for it, and Crompton snuck the ball and with a strong second effort, got the first down.

That success energized the offensive line, and the Vols moved the ball on the ground and through the air for a touchdown to take the lead with just under 2 minutes to go. The game seemed to be in hand, but this is UT football, and no lead is safe, particularly not a 4 point lead on the road. UCLA marched down the field behind the arm of Craft, who put a terrible first half behind him and took his team to the endzone with 35 seconds to go in the game.

But there was life left in the shambling corpse that was the UT offense, and following a squib kick and two Crompton completions, Daniel Lincoln kicked a 47 yard field goal to tie the game.

In overtime, UT won the toss,and that was the only victory they would get. The Vol defense did their part, holding the Bruins to a field goal, and once again, the offense failed to rise to their example. The coaches called three very conservative plays, going for another tie rather than the win. Lincoln missed a 34 yard field goal to end the game.

My Grades

Defensive Line: B- They pressured the quarterback, and made some great stops, holding UCLA to just 28 yards on the ground. But UCLA was without their starting running back.

Defensive Secondary: D- It isn't often that I'd give such a low grade to a unit with 4 interceptions in one game, but as Craft demonstrated in the second half, those interceptions were more due to bad decisions by a third string quarterback, not outstanding secondary play. In the second half, that third string quarterback looked like an All American, throwing for 260 yards.

Offensive Line F The supposed strength of the UT team couldn't handle the defensive pressure of the Bruins, particularly in the second half.

Running Backs C- Neither back broke 100 yards for the game, but both showed signs of life, digging for yardage when it was needed. Foster clearly lost the ball before being hit, even though the exchange was a good one. He just got careless.

Receivers: C Hard to grade based on the quarterback play, but I saw several good blocks downfield so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Quarterback D+ Crompton must do better. His passing was wildly off the mark at times and he's going to have to learn to handle pressure ,particularly when we start playing really tough teams.

Special Teams. C The blocked punt proved to be the margin of difference in this game, as well as the missed short field goal. The bright spot, and the only reason they don't get a failing grade, is that kick return and coverage was very good, with the single exception of Rogan's near disaster.

Coaching F. Anytime you lose a game you should win, the coaches get an F. In this case, I'll point out a few different things, like the poor play calling in Overtime. The primary problem was one of readiness. The Vols weren't ready to play. When your starting quarterback gets a penalty for a false start, that's a sign that your practice routine must be lacking something. When a team that you dominated in the first half comes out and eats your lunch in the second, that's a sign that your halftime adjustments may need some work.

The good news is that we've got almost 2 weeks before UAB comes to town. The bad news is that might not be enough time.

Are you happy now?

Do you think you've done a great service to the United States?

You've pushed a private family matter, one that has no bearing on the ability to govern, into the front pages. Your crazed desire for victory has led you down further than anybody thought was possible. You've smeared a mother, and held a teenager making the best of a very tough situation up to the glare of public scrutiny, and all because you want to handicap a Presidential campaign.

You have no shame and you have no soul, and God help America if you get any more power than you already have.

Yeah, I'm taking this personally. I know where the Palins are right now. I know what they are dealing with even without the smug sanctimonious Kossacks painting wildly delusional conspiracy theories about who fathered which child and when. I'm a grandfather and became one in circumstances very similar to Sarah Palin. And like Bristol, my daughter chose to keep her baby, and raise him, and he is a delightful toddler now, not a punishment as some would say. And if I had people saying the things they've said about Sarah and Bristol about me and my daughter, well, I'd probably be in jail right now.

Let me explain a few things to you ignorant hacks posing as media types. Sarah Palin believes in abstinence only education. Sort of. Her daughter becoming pregnant is irrelevant to that belief, or do you think teenagers never do something their parents told them not to do? If you do, you are an idiot. Teenagers make mistakes. We all do. And we all have to deal with the consequences of those mistakes. In some cases, the consequences involve a little temporary discomfort, embarrassment or pain. In other cases, lives are changed forever. That's the problem with being a teenager; for the very first time in our lives, our decisions, good or bad, begin to carry life long consequences.

Some try to push that time off by a few years, resulting in a kind of protracted adolescence where adults are protected from the consequences of their decisions. Others try to do the same thing, but only for certain kinds of decision. But those of us who are sane realize that by sheltering these new adults from the consequences of their decisions means that we are preventing them from learning how to deal with those consequences.

The Palins and I are in the latter group., and because we raised our daughters to believe that life has value, that a mistake erased is one unlearned from, and that every baby is a reason for joy, our daughters are becoming strong, healthy, sane adults. They are doing it faster than we wanted them to, but they are doing it beautifully.

Babies are not punishments, not ever. Any mind that can conceive of a baby as a punishment, or equivalent to an STD is sick and diseased. Period.

Another thing, Christianity is all about forgiveness. True Christians understand that we are not better than other people; we sin just as much as anybody else. The difference is that we are forgiven and we try to do better. And that means that when our children make a mistake, we don't hate them; we don't abandon them, and we certainly don't make them feel like they are worthless. Instead we instruct them; we help them deal with the consequences of their mistake; we forgive them; we love them.

That's not hypocrisy; that's love. If you want to see hypocrizy in action just look into a mirror.

So those of you who jumped into the fray, and whipped up this vile conspiracy theory, along with those of you who spread and perpetuated it, I hope you are satisfied with the job you've done. I hope you can sleep well. I hope you've sunk as low as you can possibly go.

But I doubt it.

There are two factors which have driven American prosperity for the last two centuries. We've always had plenty of food, and abundant energy. If we lose either one, we will lose our prosperity; it is as simple as that. Cheap plentiful food means that we can support a division of labor. Rather than every man scratching to support himself and his family, an incredibly labor intensive and environmentally destructive process, we have farms that supply the food needs of an entire nation, not to mention a significant portion of the world, which allows all of those people to work at something other than mere survival. Cheap, abundant energy not only enables these enormously productive farms, but it also allows a single man to achieve productivity levels undreamed of in earlier times. It is that productivity that creates prosperity.

These two simple facts make it clear that we must have an energy policy that deals not only with our short term needs but also plans to meet our long term goals. It means that as long as we are dependent on foreign countries for our energy needs, we are vulnerable. We've already seen what a mild rise in energy costs can do to our standard of living and our prosperity; imagine a true crisis where our ability to purchase energy is literally cut in half, or worse. The primary goal of any sane energy policy must be to put the United States on an energy sufficient basis as quickly as possible. I'll say that again.

The primary goal of any sane energy policy must be to put the United States on an energy sufficient basis as quickly as possible.

Not reducing prices at the pump. Not worrying about the greenhouse effect. Not worrying about the environmental impact 100 years from now. Not worrying about peak oil. The primary question facing us today is what is the most effective way to balance our energy equation?

And no, we won't get there by adding a couple of pounds of air to our tires.

The first thing we need to look at, obviously, is oil. We're importing 70% of the oil we need. That is insane. What that means is that the folks we buy oil from have the capability of shutting our country down literally overnight. There are two reasons that hasn't happened yet. First, the world economy is carried by the US. We may run a gigantic trade deficit, but that deficit feeds billions of non Americans. If the US economy collapses, so does everyone else's. Second, we are the only country in the world that has ever used nuclear weapons in war.

The problem is that both of those reasons are becoming less valid. Other economies are beginning to rival US dominance, including the EU, and China, just to name two. And the US is showing signs that we lack the political will to act decisively to preserve our own national interests. The party out of power, regardless of the name, has demonstrated that they are more interested in regaining political power than serving the best needs of the country while the party in power is more interested in maintaining that power. And as for the citizens, as long as it doesn't interrupt American Idol, well, they pretty much couldn't care less. That means that those of us who do care need to make sure that whatever energy policy is adopted reduces the power of other nations to control our economy and our independence.

So, how do we eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. There are only two approaches. Either we produce more oil ourselves, or we use less. Obviously, the smartest play is to combine the approaches, but we need to do it intelligently. Where will we get the most bang for our buck? How can we best allocate our resources to maximize our return, not just in the short term but in the long term?

On the production side, we can drill. We have proven reserves in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico that can go a long way toward getting us where we need to be. We also have huge amounts of oil shales that are worth recovering at the current price of oil. In fact, if we fully utilize the resources we have right now, we can be independent of foreign oil within the decade, at least for a short while.

The problem is that oil isn't the long term solution. As world wide demand increases, the price will continue to increase. India and China have rapidly expanding economies and it won't be long until their oil demand is larger than ours and the hard truth is demand will eventually permanently outstrip supply. The trick will be to postpone that inevitability until we find the technologies that will replace oil permanently. Drilling will help, and so will conservation, but they will only delay the inevitable. The long term part of our strategy must be alternative energy sources.

Let's look at the available options.

• First there's solar power. There are two aspects to solar, the first of which is solar voltaic, also called photovoltaic. Using specially constructed crystals, solar cells directly convert sunlight into electricity. The problem is the cells are energy intensive to manufacture, and the process isn't very green. Additionally, solar voltaic conversion isn't very efficient, converting about 10%-20% of the available sunlight to electricity. More promising is solar concentration, which concentrates the sun's rays just like a magnifying glass. The concentrated sunlight can be used to boil water to run a turbine generator to produce electricity or to heat a building. Steam can even be used to run an air conditioning plant.
  
  The major drawback of solar is that the sun doesn't stay out all of the time. It gets dark; it storms. We can bridge this inconvenient truth using batteries or slow discharge capacitors to store the excess electricity generated during the day, but that adds to the expense, and introduces more losses, reducing the efficiency of the system.
  
  In summary, to make solar power a viable possibility, we need better cells, manufactured in a less energy intensive way, and costing significantly less. We also need significant improvements in energy storage solutions to even out the inherently uneven supply. Concentrated solar power shows more short term promise, particularly from a conservation angle as it is easily installed in single family and multiple family dwellings, and it can have a significant impact on the energy consumption of those buildings.


• Next is wind power. Wind power is simple and very easy to understand. The wind blows, turns a turbine and generates electricity. Unfortunately, wind suffers from the same problems as solar concerning intermittency of the supply. The wind doesn't blow all of the time. That means we have the same sorts of storage issues that we have with solar. The upside is that there's a lot more wind than there is usable sunlight, and the technology is already mature. There are estimates that the US can generate all of its electricity needs from wind power alone. All we need is more turbines and fewer NIMBY idiots.


• Bio-diesel and other petroleum replacements are next. As is already apparent, ethanol from corn as a fuel is a losing proposition, and although the initial numbers for ethanol from switchgrass look promising, there's still a lot of research needed. Fuel cells are basically a shell game, a topic I've discussed in detail before. Essentially, the problem is that there is no free hydrogen in nature; we have to create it chemically, either through electrolysis of water, or the steam reformation of methane. In both cases, creating the free hydrogen consumes more energy than we get back when we burn the hydrogen, so the only way fuel cells will work is as a storage method for one of the other alternatives, like solar or wind.


• Next on the hit parade is nuclear power. There's a lot of fear and ignorance concerning nuclear power, a lot of it spread intentionally by those who don't like nuclear power regardless of the truth. And the truth is this; nuclear power has fewer risks than coal, diesel, or natural gas powered plants. The downside is that startup costs are expensive, and due to excessive regulations, not likely to decrease in the near future. The upside is virtually greenhouse emission free energy.


• Finally, there's everything else. Geothermal, wave energy, and all the other crack pot ideas floating around in the alternative energy universe. These longshots are all characterized by the years if not decades of development needed before they have any shot of becoming viable. However, they can't be completely ignored because lightening does strike occasionally and the longshot wins.

That's the energy snapshot. These are the pieces of the puzzle we have to play with. So now the job is to arrange them so that they make the most sense. Remember, our first priority is to get rid of our dependence on foreign oil. Our second priority is to develop technologies that will get us off oil altogether. We want to develop a strategy that meets our short term needs as well as moves us towards our long term goals.

The short term strategy involves leveraging current technologies to the fullest to both expand our current energy supply while acting to reduce demand through conservation. The long term strategy will involved heavy investment in those alternatives that show the most promise, or are closest to realization.

Looked at this way, the strategy becomes very clear. The following list is arranged by effectiveness in the short term.

1. We should drill for oil domestically anywhere it is cost effective to do so. This includes off shore and ANWR.


2. We should work on efficiency and conservation measures. Raising CAFE standards is only one approach. Provide incentives for energy saving solutions in industry and construction. Adjust building codes to take advantage of modern technologies.
   
3. We should build more refining capacity. Even with refineries running at peak capacity, we're importing refined fuels.
4. 
   
5. Utilize existing alternative technologies wherever they are effective. For example, I worked out on Johnston Atoll for a year. The island was 2 miles long and a half mile wide and drenched with sunshine, yet all the vehicles on the island ran on diesel and gasoline. It was the perfect place for solar electric cars.

You will note that developing alternative energy sources did not make the list. That's because this is the short term strategy. Alternative fuels, even wind, require a significant lead time for infrastructure development as well as basic R and D work, not to mention scaling the research facilities up to see if they are practical in a real world situation. For the short term, ie the next 5-10 years, alternative energies cannot play a large roll in out strategy. Long term strategy, well that's another thing.

1. Expand wind power development, particularly the problem of storage and maintaining a clean even power signal. Wind power has the highest potential for replacing a significant amount of fossil fuel based energy with the shortest development time


2. Transportation must be completely rethought. Cities have been designed around cheap transportation for decades. Trying to reverse that trend in the short term is a fool's mission. Instead, let's approach new construction from a fresh perspective. New growth areas should be developed with the view of minimizing transportation costs. Now this doesn't mean high density urban living, as is the current fashion in environmental wacko land. The village model is equally valis and has the advantage of appealing to a much greater number of people. Including bike paths, walkways, green areas, and convenient public transportation will go a long way towards convincing people to reduce car use.


3. Solar voltaic is a long way from commercial viability, but concentrated and passive solar systems should be deployed as quickly as possible, perhaps even in short term in areas where solar power is an optimum solution.


4. Fuel cells are not an energy source but a storage system. The hydrogen economy is a myth. It is a trap that will leave us exactly where we are now, with Big Oil being replaced by Big Hydrogen. As a storage system, on the other hand, fuel cells show some promise. Continue research on them in that capacity, but the fuel cell vehicle is a dead end.
   
5. Nuclear power is a safe, sane, cost effective alternative to electricity generation using fossil fuels if it allowed to be. If your goal is to create good, high paying jobs that can't be sent overseas, and result in the generation of clean power, nuclear power is the best option.

And there you have it. A comprehensive energy strategy that meets our short term needs while preparing us to meet our long term goals. And it's environmentally responsible. It gets us off of foreign energy in a short period of time while not destabilizing our economy. It moves people to live in a more environmentally friendly fashion without burdening them with a lot of top heavy regulations. Instead, the advantages of smart living are used to sell it. After all, how many people reading this would like to live in a place where they could walk to work, and pick up groceries for dinner on the way home?

I know I would.