30 Comments

1. Terrye:

Roger:

NBo offence but the American people do not want to be involved personally. I think people should be and all but I keep hearing how it is Bush’s “job” to involve people. Once upon a time when our men and women were fighting a war people did not have to be coaxed. It did not require some big PR effort to get people to give a damn. That says more about us than the President.

Jan 29, 2007 - 8:14 pm 2. Terrye:

That should be No offence, I have no idea where that B came from. sneaky B.

Jan 29, 2007 - 8:15 pm 3. Roger:

Terrye, I beg to differ. Bush and his advisers did not seize on the evident psychological truth that when you engage people in a solution, encourage them to participate themselves, they are more likely to be with you when the crunch comes.

Churchill did that brilliantly in WWII. Instead, Bush told people to go shop, keep the economy up. There’s value in that but it doesn’t involve any sacrifice. It’s weirdly distancing. If he had moved for a national energy independence campaign after 9-11, he could have brought all of us with it. There are other things people could have done too. People wanted to help. They became alienated after a while.

Now… please understand … there are many things I admire about Bush. He does have courage. He is a decent man. But he lacks greatly in public relations skills and psychological sophistication. We are paying for that now.

Jan 29, 2007 - 8:43 pm 4. David Thomson:

“Churchill did that brilliantly in WWII. Instead, Bush told people to go shop, keep the economy up.”

Roger Simon is right on this one. George W. Bush goofed up badly by not involving every American in the war on terror. Half of his current troubles are due to the fact that many Americans are confused by Bush’s war on terror rhetoric. If we are really in a fight to the death against Islamic nihilism—why are we encouraged to be so nonchalant?

Jan 29, 2007 - 9:18 pm 5. Doug S.:

I agree with Roger on this one, with the follow-up that rallying the country to energy self-sufficiency needn’t be pitched as sacrifice. Compared to the sacrifices that the consumer economy had to make in WWII, energy conservation and development of alternatives would be a positive boon to the American consumer. Using less energy means you have more money to spend on non-essentials (or a nice meal instead of instant noodles). Energy independence helps preserve American jobs and keeps the economy strong by reducing our captivity to foreign energy producers. And so on.

Given all the new technologies that will have to be developed and refined, it could be pitched as a national effort to move boldly into the future, more like the space program than recycling scrap metal, nylons and old comic books in WWII.

Well, bravo for Jim Woolsey, at any rate. It’s good to see him working on something that really matters.

Jan 29, 2007 - 9:40 pm 6. jedrury:

Impressive, commendable, now what?

The next step.

Have Robert Redford and Tom Friedman sell their SUVs and Escalades and go Prius and Honda Hybrid.

Turn the media guns on Detroit and ask Rick Waggoner; “why the Chevy Suburban?”

“Hey, Bill Ford, why the hell does Ford manufacture the Ford Expedition?”

“Hey, Carl Levin, what about holding hearings on Set America Free or would your UAW unions and supporters not approve?”

Designate the real culprits !!! And while it easy to pot shot at the president, the real culprits are in Congress and Madison Avenue and Detroit and Tokyo. Let’s get the malefactors straight.

Jan 30, 2007 - 3:19 am 7. Terrye:

Well I disagree Roger and David. Bush can not even send young men and women who are part of a volunteer miitary off to fight a war without a good deal of the press corps treating him like a baby killer.

The idea that Bush could have asked people who can not even decide if we have enemy to make a sacrifice to fight that enemy is just naive.

Jan 30, 2007 - 4:42 am 8. Terrye:

BTW, do we see any other politician stepping up and doing this? I mean if is such a bright idea and Bush goofed badly by not asking us to buy war bonds or something, surely there is a politician of one major political party or another out there doing this right now. Right? Who is it? Who is asking for sacrifice? Other than Al Gore and his enemy is fossil fuels.

Jan 30, 2007 - 4:44 am 9. jedrury:

Tom Friedman is a thought provoking guy; his book “The World is Flat” should be read in every urban high school in America even if the teacher has to read it to the students. But his video is utopian ignoring the politics and economic realities of American society.

One only has to troop down to the latest auto show – for me, the Washington Auto Show this weekend – to see what Detroit and Tokyo have in mind. The Honda hybrids and Prius are not the cars you see as you come in the door. Those are the muscle cars, the Hummers, Lincoln Navigators and the big SUVs including the Toyotas.

So while this video shows a refreshing coming together of Cold War warriors and tree huggers, the Carl Levins, the heads of the UAW, the Rick Waggoners and the Bill Fords ain’t listening, America.

Jan 30, 2007 - 6:20 am 10. Roger:

Terrye, as I sure you know, I think the press is worse than Bush, far worse. Most of it anyway.

We are in tough times (putting it mildly). Bush was a brave leader. I wish he had been a jot smarter in this hugely important area. We are in a war of ideas. Without winning that part of it, we don’t win.

Jan 30, 2007 - 7:43 am 11. Roger:

jedrury, this video may be utopian, but you have to start somewhere. People can do a lot of things. We went to the moon and so forth decades ago. We need leadership in this area. I would like to see Bush really step up and publicly endorse this, even with his disastrous poll numbers. He would help the cause and participating in the cause would help his numbers – I bet.

Jan 30, 2007 - 7:47 am 12. Stace:

One of my relatives is involved with a similar group, the Energy Security Leadership Council,

http://www.secureenergy.org

It’s largely a coalition of transportation company execs and retired military.The military are concerned with the costs to the US in securing the oil supply for all the other industrial countries, since the burden largely falls on us.

It seems to me that Bush is being influenced by these groups in his alternative energy thinking.

BTW, I have a Suburban because I need one, and I would scream to high heaven if they quit making them. When I was a kid all we had to use on the ranch was the old style pickup, and there was no room for kids up front. We rode in the back with the dogs, which I thought was fun, except during lightning storms.This is so dangerous that it’s not even legal in some places now. There is no way I will go back to that. MY SUV–COLD DEAD HANDS.

But there is no reason that they can’t make a plug-in hybrid Suburban. I would happily buy one even if it were more expensive.

Jan 30, 2007 - 8:15 am 13. Roger:

Exactly, Stace. We’re going to need a larger vehicle for dogs, kids, etc. We’re thinking of a Mercury Mariner or a Toyota Highlander, but not crazy about either. Maybe there’s something else coming out.

Jan 30, 2007 - 9:02 am 14. Stace:

Roger, there was talk at GM a couple of years ago about hybrid Suburbans planned for later in the decade, and frankly, I am not up on what, if anything, is happening with that.

Some of the energy independence groups advocate a sharp tightening of CAFE standards. I was always against that in the past, because safety is far more important to me than mpg. But now it seems that we have the technology to improve mpg without turning vehicles into little deathtraps. Maybe it is time to get the (gasp!) government (horrors!) to start mandating this.

Jan 30, 2007 - 10:30 am 15. syn:

Roger

The missing key element, during WW2 Hollywood was on the side of America’s Victory.

I will agree that this administration’s use of language is vague and undefined but how is this any different from the vague and undefined language of our populist culture?

I like your idea about energy campaign but who can Bush turn to in the creative entertainment field who will have the skills and tools to create a massive nationwide drive when the majority in that industry believes Bush is Hitler?

From my observation I find that for many Americans 9/11 changed nothing in their lives; still busy going to the movies, pop concerts, consuming 24/7 streaming music videos, attending/watching the Oscars,/SAG/People’s Choice/Grammy/MTV etc, etc, etc, getting boob jobs, peter jobs and plastic fantastic faces, doing the Hug fest, the Sex fest and the Sundance Film fest, literally skateboarding their way though life. They’d hate this war regardless of who is President.

Jan 30, 2007 - 10:42 am 16. AlanC:

I’m all for conservation and SENSIBLE alternatives. Let’s just keep that ecofundie religion of “manmade global warming” out of the discussion.

Two new books

Jan 30, 2007 - 11:09 am 17. Sandy P:

They’re not right – but we need to get off this rock anyway – saw a program a few years ago about the moon, it’s pulling farther way and that’s not good. We’re in balance.

AND

Another program last year – 250 million years from now NYC’s going to be underwater, anyway.

It’ll be 1 big continent again.

What he should have done is put a tax on gas. And pushed thru drilling everywhere, we have enough to take care of ourselves.

Jan 30, 2007 - 11:28 am 18. Terrye:

During the Cold War when Kruschev and his ilk were threatening to bury us the President of the United States did not ration butter or meat or gas or anything else.

During WW2 the whole country got the idea we were at war, right now half the country thinks the enemy is the bush administration who is just trying to scare us with this terrorist stuff.

Now, my point is that there is a good deal of cogntive dissonance to get past before Bush can ask people to sacrifice. Look at the big housese people are building, the vacations they take, and somehow Bush is supposed to say, heat with wood folks or something like that. Really that is just silly. What we need are some technological advances, not WW2 style sacrifices that people will not tolerate.

Jan 30, 2007 - 12:36 pm 19. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

An important difference from the WWII situation is this: a conventional war is limited in duration, so the special things that people were asked to do–rationing, victory gardens, women wielding rivet guns for the sake of the cause–were not viewed as permanant parts of their lives. The current war is unlikely to have a clearly definable end.

Jan 30, 2007 - 12:44 pm 20. Stace:

AlanC–I just finished the Singer book, and it certainly made sense to me.

I try to listen to both sides of the AGW issue, but there are real concerns with the IPCC’s methods (as with many of the UN’s projects, no?) . They are releasing the Summary for Policy Makers on Friday to great worldwide publicity. But the actual technical report won’t be released for three more months, and IPCC stated policy says that they may edit the science to match the summary! Or at the very least, the media will be hyping the summary, but skeptics won’t be able to evaluate the science until after all the hoohah has died down.

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1103#comments

Jan 30, 2007 - 12:52 pm 21. AlanC:

Stace,

I’ve enough statistics training to follow the arguments of the skeptics vis a vis the IPCC and they are very persuasive.

Read, if you haven’t, the refutations on JunkScience and you’ll see that the infamous IPCC hockey stick is a total statistical crock. If you feed their equations random data you STILL get a hockey stick.

This stuff is right up there with the Lancet casualty study.

I heard an interesting anecdote the other day that a receding glacier in the Alps uncovered a Roman period mining operation. Guess that glacier’s been coming and going for a while.

Jan 30, 2007 - 1:28 pm 22. Cap'n Billy:

I recall after the first energy crisis of the early 70’s I said, “Well, at least now we’ll become energy independent and stop depending on this unstable part of the world for oil.” Never in my wildest nightmares did I suspect that 30-odd years later we would be more dependent on them than ever. Thanks a lot Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth and all the other usual gadflies and all the poltroon politicians that allowed themselves to be intimidated by them.

Jan 30, 2007 - 1:49 pm 23. Stace:

Thanks for the information, Alan. I suspect that interesting story of the roman mine emerging from the glacier has caused some panties to get bunched up.

Jan 30, 2007 - 2:08 pm 24. Sandy P:

Via Bros. Judd:

THE STEFANI WIVES (via Bryan Francoeur):

Chairman: Bush officials misled public on global warming (AP, January 30, 2007)

The Democratic chairman of a House panel examining the government’s response to climate change said Tuesday there is evidence that senior Bush administration officials sought repeatedly “to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming.”

Because the Left can’t tolerate doubt.

Jan 30, 2007 - 2:23 pm 25. Stace:

I just received this link to a picture of folks from the group I mentioned, secureenergy.org, meeting with the President yesterday.

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/070129/ids_photos_ts/r1302972970.jpg

I would bet that he’s been meeting with Woolsey’s group, too.

Jan 30, 2007 - 5:29 pm 26. Barry Dauphin:

I have come to the conclusion that the President has not developed a strong enough communication strategy and effort, although I felt very much like terrye for a long time. I believe the issue is more complicated than that Bush isn’t smart in this area, becuase whether he is or not, there are lots of smart people around him.

Nonetheless no market democracy maintains a war effort without this. How many WWII film clips were played at the cinema during the war to keep the population informed and on board with the effort? Maybe people used to support war efforts without being prompted to, but I really doubt it. In either event, we no longer live in that world. We are a rich and somewhat spoiled citizenry that will need to be involved in some ways that we haven’t been so far. In some ways it might be too late to salvage a public relations strategy vis a vis Iraq. Success (however defined) will have to be the public relations strategy. Should the surge succeed and the picture change, Bush will be considered a genius down the road. If not, I think few people will blame it on a communications problem.

Energy independence is a big dream, perhaps even a grandiose dream, but if we are in an existential conflict, then we had better dream big. Although Bush has been somewhat allergic to the idea of a Big Government effort like this, he has used Big Government for education reform and creating the Dept. of Homeland Security (and yes I know the Administration didn’t want to but they did it and Bush showed less resolve about that issue than about Iraq in general) and has not been a small government President, except in rhetoric.

It is conceivable that “go shop” was not only about maintaing normalcy, but also about letting the Islamofascists know that we are going about our business, so F you. I think that the Administration did not plan to be in such a precarious position in Iraq in 2007 (yeah, no joke-ed). I believe most officials thought the worst would be long over there by now. I think that the Administration has perceived that we are about over the hump numerous times, but not. So the idea of developing this kind of strategy probably seemed unnecessary at an earlier point, because the WoT (outside of Iraq and Afghanistan) would be much less visible and less like a convnetional war. I also believe that the Administration hasn’t figured out how to have a communications strategy in this kind of war effort, which is more like fighting the IRA on steroids than anything we did in WWII.

Jan 30, 2007 - 6:40 pm 27. timmah!:

Energy reform is power lying in the street (yuk yuk). Whoever picks it up will be tough to beat. Just yesterday there was a report out on behalf of DoE stating that we could pretty easily and very cleanly generate 2,000 times our annual electricity consumption using enhanced geothermal power. For about $1B over the next 10 years, we could develop a commercial scale op; using that technology we could shift 10% of our electricity production to geothermal in 2050. No hydrogen miracles required. Who wouldn’t like that?

http://biz.yahoo.com/seekingalpha/070129/25373_id.html?.v=1

http://geothermal.inel.gov/publications/future_of_geothermal_energy.pdf

Jan 30, 2007 - 7:47 pm 28. Terrye:

I think Barry is right here. It is also hard to keep up support for the war when the Senate seems to think that Commander in Chief is a shared a position and they have the right to interject themselves into the decision making process.

How did presidents ever manage to do their jobs before there was a Washngton Press Corp and the Gallup poll?

Jan 31, 2007 - 3:27 am 29. bigger:

I tend to agree with you on the problems which have resulted from Bush’s failure to become a great communicator, but I suspect this was done deliberately. The war we are waging is not against ‘terror’ but against ‘islamofascist jihadism,’ which would have required Bush to accurately name the enemy, which would have resulted in most moslems being seen as the ‘enemy’ by most Americans, with enormous problems arising from that.

As to climate amageddon. My MA was in archaeology — I know for a fact that the ‘past’ described by Mann et al.’s hockey stick is fraud, that Oreskes’ _Science_ paper describing a ‘consensus’ is, well, something she should not be proud of putting on her resume (Google ‘Oreskes Peiser [or Peisser]). _Science_ has a tendency to just igore anyone who isn’t ‘with the program.’ People interested in the problem should go to wwws ‘climateaudit.org’ {for the Mannists) ‘realclimate.com,’ or ‘climatechange.com’ or ‘motls.blogspot.com’ for corrective data. As to the IPCC, they are a political body from the UN, the same people who gave us Oil for Food and the Rwanda genocide.

Jan 31, 2007 - 10:57 am 30. Barry Dauphin:

It looks like the website Climate Audit (www.climateaudit.com) has been hijacked. I posted a comment earlier, and when I went back to check, there’s another site in its place. What’s free speech when we’re dealing with Armageddon.

Jan 31, 2007 - 8:55 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: