Home

President Carter tells us that by increasing gas mileage
1 mile per gallon for all of the cars in America; within one
year we would save more oil than could possibly be
pumped out of ANWR in 30 years. Actually, the real
reason for assaulting ANWR slipped off the forked
tongue of GOP House Leader Tom Delay back in 2003
“…’It's about precedent,’ DeLay told the assembled
Republican leaders”. "Drilling in the Arctic Refuge is not
about energy independence or the war on terrorism,"
said Rodger Schlickeisen, President of Defenders of
Wildlife. "The drive to drill for oil in the Arctic Refuge is
about oil company profits and lifting barriers to future oil
exploration in protected lands, pure and simple."

Thomas Friedman in his article “Behold the Oil Burning
Bush” (KC Star 2/18/05) points out that as long as we
continue to avoid doing anything to curb our oil
consumption, we are insuring that countries like Iran,
Saudi Arabia, and Sudan will have a ready supply of our
dollars. As long as we continue to over-consume, they
will be able to set the price on oil. (I paid $209.9 for gas
today, how are prices in your area?). Why not reduce
consumption, reduce the demand, reduce the price,
reduce the trade deficit, reduce global warming! Duh!.

Friedman further points out; we are financing both sides
of the war. We are sending troops to fight in lands that
support terrorism. Terrorism that is in turn supported by
oil money we send to the Mid East because we won’t
even consider reducing the power “we think we are
entitled to” when we get behind that steering wheel.
Now, just how smart is that?

Members of Congress plotting a sneak
attack on the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge. Oil industry allies in the House and
Senate will try to use a sneaky back door
maneuver to open the Arctic Refuge to oil drilling.
They know their drilling proposal is too
controversial to ever get the 60 votes it needs to
pass through the usual legislative channels. So
instead, they're going to try to slip their unpopular
drilling proposal into the must-pass federal budget
bill. Please click here to sign a petition to help
head them off at the pass

I get so puzzled; puzzled by why the Administration and some groups within our
society so angrily oppose even considering any reduction to ‘anything’ that
might slow global warming and protect the air we breathe or the water we
drink. Supporters of environmental issues are labeled “radical environmental
wackos”, because we advance the idea of cutting back on the use of oil or the
reduction of mercury. Rush Limbaugh in a Mar. 1st. tirade used the recently
aired report about the increase in average life span of human males to launch
a sarcastic rant beginning with: “How could this be?”: 'the air is so polluted,
the water is so polluted'; so say the wackos, etc." On and on, he raged for a
full 2 minutes. Proving to one and all (his dittoheads) that environmental
wackos, aside from being stupid and nuts, are totally wrong. And everything is
just peachy with the way we live!

Why must it be, that any attempt to protect nature or life, including human life,
from environmental abuse, somehow becomes a personal affront to our
American way of life? If we try to protect a forest or an animal species, there
are those who will oppose it simply because it questions man’s rights and
power over nature. The beauty and benefit of nature be damned! Our quality
of life be damned! Nothing should stand in the way of man's “progress” and
destruction. We must drill in ANWR. Why? Well, the authorized version of the
story is: to solve our immediate oil shortages and free us from dependence
upon terrorist countries. Yet it will take a minimum of 10 years to even begin
producing oil from ANWR. It will take another 30 to 40 years to produce what
could be accomplished in one year with a plan offered by President Carter.