As any citizen, regardless of party affiliation, will be looking through articles, watching videos and downloading soundclips of candidates' speeches, many of them will be scanning through for the real solutions proposed for this mess of an economy. While the detailed answers are not readily available, Friedman makes a point of at least informing us who doesn't have them, or who is distracted by any new perceived attack rather than focusing on what actually matters. It's clear that Sen. John McCain has some placating to do and the column points out that he and his party are certainly not on the forefront of technology or tactics to help.
For example, Friedman dwells on the fact that McCain along with significant figures from the GOP are encouraging Americans to drill for oil and the columnist harps on the idea that this is a complete reversal of what we should do and what the party stands for. He uses a word that we have come to adore: change. Republicans, he says, who are the party of business, need to address and embrace change and find a way to create new jobs through investing efforts and money into researching new clean fuels and alternative energy.
Friedman emphasizes the idea that a "real energy policy based on building a whole new energy infrastructure [is] the only way we can put steel back into America's spine." I may be biased because I do agree with his statement, but am furthermore persuaded because he goes on to strengthen his argument by one, discrediting McCain's stances and two, bringing in the more broad perspective that America dearly needs this energy solution for both Americans' cars and wallets.
It wouldn't be a surprise to hear that everyone is sick of this whole "lipstick on a pig" issue, but Friedman does mock the expression in a way that is fitting and congruent with the editorial.
2 comments:
As written in Friedman's column, America may want to rethink the idea, “drill, baby, drill!” and rather, “invent, baby, invent?”
If a goal of invention is put forth, maybe the government will use whatever out-of-the-box thinking is left and make a true effort to change oil prices and give American people something in return for emptying their wallets at the pump.
America has been deemed an innovative society with the ability to develop new technologies that can benefit the economy and life of the people. If the government wants to maintain their power and admirers, the 2008 presidential candidates could consider issues like new clean energy sources to ensure a secure future of the U.S for the people who live here.
First off I just want to say that the "scary" picture Friedman paints of three despotic powers high fiving in the face of American oil drilling just doesn't make sense. McCain and the GOP are advocating that we drill HERE, in America, thereby cutting dependency of foreign crude (most of which comes from Canada anyway.)
I say drill within reason. We need the oil and we pay out the anus for it, so we might as well make use of the resources available because cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon. The world can't run on hybrids because there ain't enough lithium to go around. What are our options for the next twenty years, get out and walk everywhere? Personally I hate being at the mercy of oil cartels like OPEC, who recently announced they were lowering production volume to keep the price of crude over $103 a barrel.
For what its worth, Americans' are making an effort to "go green", but I don't see shoring up our oil reserves as a bad thing. We may even end up exporting it to countries like China and India and maybe offsetting some of those trillions of dollars of debt.
Post a Comment