America needs to become energy independent.
Why? Do we also need to become textile, agriculture, manufacturing, IT, and service independent? What is unique about energy? Wouldn’t most fiscal conservatives be in favor of purchasing goods and services from where each can be produced with the most value?
Presidents Nixon and Carter talked about energy independence, but not a lot got done.
Great, President Nixon and Carter were two of the least fiscally conservative Presidents of my lifetime and now Mayor Giuliani is referencing them as reliable authorities.
It will require setting goals, sticking to them and energizing the American people to achieve them. It will require expanding our reliance on a much more diverse range of energy sources that America can control.
Soviet style fiscal conservatism is not fiscal conservatism to most real fiscal conservatives.
But it is embarrassing that Brazil is so far ahead of America in the use of ethanol.
Why? Does America have to always lead? Don’t fiscal conservatives believe lots of small experiments are superior to national directives? If Brazil is successful, can’t America copy their success or purchase ethanol from them? Are we sure we want to use food for fuel? Do we want or need more corn fields instead of drilling holes?
The government needs to help business establish competitive, cost-effective technologies in the short-run.
President Nixon and Carter might even know this sounds a lot more like Lenin than it sounds like Reagan.
We can sell our advances to countries like China and India.
Just like we used to buy from China and India when each of those two countries were centrally controlled. Oh wait, we didn’t buy from them when they were centrally controlled; we started buying from them when they started allowing entrepreneurs to individually make economic decisions.
Mayor Giuliani may be right about the war on terror, but when he pens a piece like this, he is only going to get support from those who think Nixon and Carter were good Presidents.
3 comments:
Right! Plus --
Giuliani's record should give heart palpitations to civil libertarians, of both the 2nd Amendment types and leave-me-alone types.
I didn't really watch the 9/11 TV coverage after the 2nd plane hit. I had a lot of work to do, and I didn't really see the point. I guess Giuliani impressed a lot of people by walking around on the streets in front of TV cameras. But he was on the streets because his terrorism headquarters had been in WTC and was destroyed. And the headquarters was in WTC because Giuliani overruled the advice to put it in Brooklyn.
Hi Rick,
I kind of like Mayor Giuliani, but I don’t want him to be President because he does remind me of President Nixon. He doesn’t seem to have an economic or moral soul; he just blows with the political winds. Incidentally, just like President Nixon, he is moving right in the primary season and he will be moving left in the general election if he is nominated.
However, I do suspect he is the type of politician Americans will want as President after the Clinton and Bush administrations. Hopefully, Republicans will provide the firewall, but I don’t have a clue who the Republicans will end up nominating.
Hi David -- I think the Nixon analogy is a good one. My guess is that it will be Giuliani and Clinton and that a lot of pro-lifers and libertarians will end up voting for Ron Paul as the Libertarian candidate. Of course, social conservatives will have to deal with the fact that voting for Paul helps elect Clinton.
Post a Comment