Do please check out Tom Friedman's column today,
No Mullah Left Behind [pops].
He hammers Bush with great vigor on his complete refusal to do anything to reduce our energy consumption, which would be great in so many ways. Money quote from Friedman and some thoughts after the jump...
As Friedman puts it:
It would buy reform in some of the worst regimes in the world, from Tehran to Moscow. It would reduce the chances that the U.S. and China are going to have a global struggle over oil - which is where we are heading. It would help us to strengthen the dollar and reduce the current account deficit by importing less crude. It would reduce climate change more than anything in Kyoto. It would significantly improve America's standing in the world by making us good global citizens. It would shrink the budget deficit. It would reduce our dependence on the Saudis so we could tell them the truth. (Addicts never tell the truth to their pushers.) And it would pull China away from its drift into supporting some of the worst governments in the world, like Sudan's, because it needs their oil. Most important, making energy independence our generation's moon shot could help inspire more young people to go into science and engineering, which we desperately need.
Sadly, the Bush team won't even consider this.
One of the things I loved best about John Kerry was his grasp and appreciation of these issues surrounding energy conservation. Bush will have none of it, even though it would be of enormous benefit to our national security in addition to its environmental and other benefits.
There seem to be a few Republicans who are on Friedman's side in this, but only a few. You don't even hear many Democrats really pushing this issue hard. I'd love to see it get much more play.
[P.S. Searching to check that this hadn't been diaried already, all I pulled up was Armando's "Fuck Thomas Friedman" for his previous column. Sorry Armando! When he's right he's right! :) ]