BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Jimmy Fucking Carter

TUESDAY JULY 22 2008 6:00 AM

Submitted by FearTheReaper. Edited By FearTheReaper.

TAGS: Gas crisis, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan

Now that we are in the middle of an energy disaster brought on by years of idiotic energy policy that were begun under the Grand Retard, Ronald Reagan, let’s take a look at what Jimmy Carter wanted to do. We didn’t do much of it, because Carter told Americans the truth and we cried like fucking babies and continued to shit our pants. If we had listened to Carter, we’d be toilet trained by now. Instead, we are living in the most horribly shit-in diapers of all time. And it’s pretty much all the fault of the right wing.

Carter delivered an energy speech on July 15, 1979. At the time, things were not looking good. The U.S. was being hit by record high energy prices, severe energy shortages, and a recession. (Sound familiar?) People were pissed at Carter, causing his approval ratings to plummet to Bush-like depths. Imagine that. A president as unpopular as Bush. So, Carter gave a speech, during which he asked the American people to adapt to the energy crisis, its limits and to change our ways.

Carter said, "Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but by what one owns." He was right, of course. But Carter didn’t have the ability to convince his fellow lawmakers to make the tough choices. He was labeled a “pessimist.” Naturally, for every pessimist, there is an optimist. In this case, it was Ronald Reagan. Reagan blew hot wind up America’s ass and we went right back to our destructive ways. Reagan was a pretty fucking stupid human being. As matter of fact, he was shockingly stupid. Had we listened to Carter and accepted a bit of personal responsibility, we might not be driving rapidly toward a cliff today.

The problems Carter identified in his speech were our dependence on oil and the connection among consumption, energy use, and environmental change. Sound familiar?

Here are some highlights from Jimmy Carter’s “Crisis of Confidence” Speech.


CARTER: Point one: I am tonight setting a clear goal for the energy policy of the United States. Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 -- never...


And no. Not only will we, but we’ll use more and more and more. Jimmy didn’t really foresee the right wing jerk off transportation vessel called The Hummer and the murder of alternative energy.


Point two: To ensure that we meet these targets, I will use my presidential authority to set import quotas...


Good luck with that.


Point three: To give us energy security, I am asking for the most massive peacetime commitment of funds and resources in our nation's history to develop America's own alternative sources of fuel...

I will soon submit legislation to Congress calling for the creation of this nation's first solar bank, which will help us achieve the crucial goal of 20 percent of our energy coming from solar power by the year 2000.

These efforts will cost money, a lot of money, and that is why Congress must enact the windfall profits tax without delay...


Could you imagine if we had the intelligence to follow through with this? Twenty-percent solar? We’d be a tad better off. Carter was saying we needed the largest “peacetime commitment of funds” because our path would obviously lead to wars. And it has. And it will lead to more, and eventually a world war.


Point four: I'm asking Congress to mandate, to require as a matter of law, that our nation's utility companies cut their massive use of oil by 50 percent within the next decade and switch to other fuels, especially coal, our most abundant energy source...


Uh. Okay. Not so great. Coal’s a bit of a bummer. But it is preferable to being controlled by OPEC and having to take over countries like Iraq and Afghanistan in order to keep our gluttonous habits going. Carter was actually successful with this one. He reduced the percentage of oil used in our electricity production from 20% to 3%. He also expanded the Clean Air Act to combat the effects of coal power generation.


Point five: To make absolutely certain that nothing stands in the way of achieving these goals, I will urge Congress to create an energy mobilization board which, like the War Production Board in World War II, will have the responsibility and authority to cut through the red tape, the delays, and the endless roadblocks to completing key energy projects.

We will protect our environment. But when this Nation critically needs a refinery or a pipeline, we will build it.


Anyone want to guess when the last refinery was built in the U.S.? Try 32 years. That's the free market kicking ass and taking numbers. Although, South Dakota is now threatening to build one. That would be 1 in 32 years.


Point six: I'm proposing a bold conservation program to involve every state, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle. This effort will permit you to build conservation into your homes and your lives at a cost you can afford.


No fucking shit. This is the point where I want to dig up guys like Reagan, just to shit on their head. Personal fucking responsibility is the great enemy of right-wingers. Reagan killed all the tax credits that would have allowed people to "build conservation into their homes."


To further conserve energy, I'm proposing tonight an extra $10 billion over the next decade to strengthen our public transportation systems...


Whoa! Public transportation! Now close your eyes and imagine every city with a working subway system, or rail line. Mmmm. Carter. Jimmy also pushed for fuel economy standards in cars to reduce oil consumption. Republicans fought back. And they created tax rebates for giant SUVs and Hummers.


Our nation must be fair to the poorest among us, so we will increase aid to needy Americans to cope with rising energy prices. We often think of conservation only in terms of sacrifice. In fact, it is the most painless and immediate way of rebuilding our nation's strength. Every gallon of oil each one of us saves is a new form of production. It gives us more freedom, more confidence, that much more control over our own lives...


No shit. But that’s not the Republican way. The Republican way is to get more money into the pockets of oil companies. Every step outlined above takes money away from the oil boys. So, when Reagan took over, he slowly eliminated anything that would have led us away from a path of energy independence.

Instead of confronting the problem head on, Reagan chose to mock Carter. He went after the president, claiming he blamed the American people for the energy crisis – because Carter had the gall to ask Americans to sacrifice and conserve. It was, quite simply, a moron vs. a thinking man.


[President Carter] has blamed the people for inflation, OPEC, he has blamed the Federal Reserve system, he has blamed the lack of productivity of the American people, he has then accused the people of living too well and that we must share in scarcity, we must sacrifice and get used to doing with less.


I'm not so sure that it means steadily higher fuel costs, but I do believe that this nation has been portrayed for too long a time to the people as being energy-poor when it is energy-rich. . . I just happen to believe that free enterprise can do a better job of producing the things that people need than government can.


And that has been the right wing stance ever since. Conservatives have no ability to comprehend complex answers to the energy challenges we face. It’s like trying to talk to a cat about math. So, when you hear a Republican telling us how we should drill off the coast of our country, please urinate on their face. Because drilling was their answer to the crisis in the '70s and we did it. It has not helped. No one should ever listen to a Republican when it comes to energy. There is only one answer: Invest in alternative energy now.

If a right wing asshole attempts to open his pork rind hole, tell him the story of the solar panels on the White House. Jimmy Carter had them installed during his presidency. Reagan then had them torn down. He also killed off tax cuts for solar power and gutted our solar research program. How’d that work out? Oh, I can tell you. Two of the solar researchers he fired went on the win Nobel prizes – in other fields. Because he was a Class A fucking idiot.


"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do."
- Ronald “retard” Reagan, 1981.



FearTheReaper is a writer, comic and actor. You may read more of his naughtiness on his blog, Stop All Monsters.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Next

felony187

felony187

Denver, CO
June 2007

JUL 22, 2008 06:29 PM

I've always thought that Carter was fucked in oh so many ways, by oh so many people. Never has a president gotten the raw end of the deal the way he did. I've posted several times in regards to the gas prices, how america fucked themselves by voting in raygun.

WADO

WADO

Brooklyn, NY
March 2006

JUL 22, 2008 07:14 PM

You almost want to just shout until your fucking larynx falls off that people get the president they deserve, but its just not comforting, because either way, you still have to convince a nation of goat-faced retards that these changes are going to save their life, and goat-faced retards tend not to listen to things like that.

Sick

Sick

Minneapolis, MN
June 2003

JUL 22, 2008 07:16 PM

felony187 said:
I've always thought that Carter was fucked in oh so many ways, by oh so many people. Never has a president gotten the raw end of the deal the way he did. I've posted several times in regards to the gas prices, how america fucked themselves by voting in raygun.



Not just people, either. The man was attacked by a rabbit. Nasty, big, pointy teeth.

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE
May 2006

JUL 22, 2008 07:23 PM

Sick said:

felony187 said:
I've always thought that Carter was fucked in oh so many ways, by oh so many people. Never has a president gotten the raw end of the deal the way he did. I've posted several times in regards to the gas prices, how america fucked themselves by voting in raygun.



Not just people, either. The man was attacked by a rabbit. Nasty, big, pointy teeth.



He's got . . .
He did . . .

LOOK AT THE BONES!!

roubles

roubles

I'm lost
June 2008

JUL 22, 2008 07:49 PM

Obama has continued to support corn ethanol which is the one fuel that's worse than oil. The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE
May 2006

JUL 22, 2008 07:57 PM

roubles said:
Obama has continued to support corn ethanol which is the one fuel that's worse than oil. The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.



And you, of course, have proof that he's in the pocket of big AG companies.

roubles

roubles

I'm lost
June 2008

JUL 22, 2008 08:04 PM

coyotemike said:

roubles said:
Obama has continued to support corn ethanol which is the one fuel that's worse than oil. The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.



And you, of course, have proof that he's in the pocket of big AG companies.



Sure. This was in a little paper called the New York Times on 6/23/08. Maybe you've heard of it.

Mr. Obama is running as a reformer who is seeking to reduce the influence of special interests. But like any other politician, he has powerful constituencies that help shape his views. And when it comes to domestic ethanol, almost all of which is made from corn, he also has advisers and prominent supporters with close ties to the industry at a time when energy policy is a point of sharp contrast between the parties and their presidential candidates.

...

Nowadays, when Mr. Obama travels in farm country, he is sometimes accompanied by his friend Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota. Mr. Daschle now serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and works at a Washington law firm where, according to his online job description, "he spends a substantial amount of time providing strategic and policy advice to clients in renewable energy."

Mr. Obama's lead advisor on energy and environmental issues, Jason Grumet, came to the campaign from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan initiative associated with Mr. Daschle and Bob Dole, the Kansas Republican who is also a former Senate majority leader and a big ethanol backer who had close ties to the agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland.



Obama/ethanol

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE
May 2006

JUL 22, 2008 08:10 PM

roubles said:

coyotemike said:

roubles said:
Obama has continued to support corn ethanol which is the one fuel that's worse than oil. The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.



And you, of course, have proof that he's in the pocket of big AG companies.



Sure. This was in a little paper called the New York Times on 6/23/08. Maybe you've heard of it.

Mr. Obama is running as a reformer who is seeking to reduce the influence of special interests. But like any other politician, he has powerful constituencies that help shape his views. And when it comes to domestic ethanol, almost all of which is made from corn, he also has advisers and prominent supporters with close ties to the industry at a time when energy policy is a point of sharp contrast between the parties and their presidential candidates.

...

Nowadays, when Mr. Obama travels in farm country, he is sometimes accompanied by his friend Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota. Mr. Daschle now serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and works at a Washington law firm where, according to his online job description, "he spends a substantial amount of time providing strategic and policy advice to clients in renewable energy."

Mr. Obama's lead advisor on energy and environmental issues, Jason Grumet, came to the campaign from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan initiative associated with Mr. Daschle and Bob Dole, the Kansas Republican who is also a former Senate majority leader and a big ethanol backer who had close ties to the agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland.



Obama/ethanol



First, there's no need to be an ass about this.

Second, are we supposed to swap our corn farms for sugar-cane?

Third, Obama is still a state senator from a major corn state. He is doing his current job to support corn farmers interests.

roubles

roubles

I'm lost
June 2008

JUL 22, 2008 08:27 PM

coyotemike said:

roubles said:

coyotemike said:

roubles said:
Obama has continued to support corn ethanol which is the one fuel that's worse than oil. The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.



And you, of course, have proof that he's in the pocket of big AG companies.



Sure. This was in a little paper called the New York Times on 6/23/08. Maybe you've heard of it.

Mr. Obama is running as a reformer who is seeking to reduce the influence of special interests. But like any other politician, he has powerful constituencies that help shape his views. And when it comes to domestic ethanol, almost all of which is made from corn, he also has advisers and prominent supporters with close ties to the industry at a time when energy policy is a point of sharp contrast between the parties and their presidential candidates.

...

Nowadays, when Mr. Obama travels in farm country, he is sometimes accompanied by his friend Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota. Mr. Daschle now serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and works at a Washington law firm where, according to his online job description, "he spends a substantial amount of time providing strategic and policy advice to clients in renewable energy."

Mr. Obama's lead advisor on energy and environmental issues, Jason Grumet, came to the campaign from the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan initiative associated with Mr. Daschle and Bob Dole, the Kansas Republican who is also a former Senate majority leader and a big ethanol backer who had close ties to the agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland.



Obama/ethanol



First, there's no need to be an ass about this.

Second, are we supposed to swap our corn farms for sugar-cane?

Third, Obama is still a state senator from a major corn state. He is doing his current job to support corn farmers interests.



You made a snide remark doubting I had any proof to back up my statement. At the risk of sounding like a six year old, "he started it."

Keep growing the corn but sell it as food. Remove the tariff from sugar cane from Brazil. That's a temporary fix but longer term I think swiitchgrass might be a big part of the answer from what I've read.

Big picture I don't think they're helping anyone by continuing to prop up a industry that needs such huge subsidies and tariffs to survive. The subsidy money would be better spent finding better solutions and using more sugar cane ethanol in the meantime. I think much of the increased price is due to the weak dollar instead of demand but that's another can of worms.

RedBstrd

RedBstrd

Pomona, CA
April 2004

JUL 22, 2008 09:31 PM

roubles said:
The best idea now is sugar cane ethanol which is far more energy efficient and clean. Fat chance of Obama supporting that since he's in the pocket of the big AG companies.



Sugar cane production is incredibly water intensive, meaning that we grow sugar cane in only a few tropical locations in the US (Louisiana, Florida, Hawaii, Texas, etc.). Our annual sugar cane production is only 25 million tons, almost all of which we consume domestically. Harvesting sugar cane traditionally requires burning of fields, as is done in Brazil, and releases a large amount of greenhouse gases.

One ton of corn can yield 98 gallons of ethanol, while the same amount of sugar can can only yield 80 gallons of ethanol. This ratio means that even if all of our sugar cane production went for ethanol, then we could produce about 2 billion gallons of ethanol. The Senate currently calls for 36 billion gallons by 2022 in our Renewable Fuels Standards . To meet this goal, we would need to increase production by eighteen times the max capacity that we can now produce and shift all of our current production towards making ethanol (we could still use our sugar beets for sugar, though). Our corn production is over 11 times as much as our sugar cane production.

In terms of economics, ethanol from sugar cane is twice as expensive as ethanol from corn. Meanwhile, it is more profitable for sugar producers to turn sugar cane into food-quality sugar than to turn it into ethanol.

These shortcomings mean that ethanol production from sugar cane may be a good idea, but we cannot shift from petroleum to sugar cane ethanol for a very long time. Looking to corn-based ethanol is the more immediate answer.

As Keith Collins of the USDA noted:
At some point in the future it may be worthy of commercial development. Technologically, it's possible. The question is: is it economically feasible?



Of course, you ignored all of the facts of the issue and offered the argument that Obama is promoting corn-based ethanol because of alleged corruption. whatever

Sources:
SKIL
Wikipedia
CNN Money
USDA Rural Development
USDA - Corn Production in US
FAO UN Statistics - Sugar Production in the US

RedBstrd

RedBstrd

Pomona, CA
April 2004

JUL 22, 2008 09:37 PM

roubles said:

Keep growing the corn but sell it as food. Remove the tariff from sugar cane from Brazil. That's a temporary fix but longer term I think swiitchgrass might be a big part of the answer from what I've read.



Cutting the tariff on sugar cane and its ethanol from Brazil would provide even greater incentive for American sugar producers to convert their sugar cane into food-quality sugar (which is already the more economical decision). In other words, we would produce less sugar-based ethanol here. As such, it would provide cheaper ethanol for consumers but hurt the development of an sugar cane ethanol industry in the US. This situation isn't one with an easy fix.

ardour

ardour

Ottawa, ON
March 2006

JUL 22, 2008 09:38 PM

I just find it so funny that I can remember being a teenager arguing on the internet with people during the 2001 election. A big talking point was about how Al Gore wanted to kill the internal combustion engine. There was outrage. "He's going to ban SUVS! He said so in his book!" these kids were screaming. Everything that has happened since then just seemed so damn predictable.

Vadennoi

Vadennoi

San Jose, CA
December 2005

JUL 22, 2008 09:55 PM

My biggest hope is not the replacement of the ICE, nor corn fuel, nor even a better president than Bush. It's the production of fuel from waste. In case you guys don't read slashdot: "Vetrolium"

I imagine it'd be like that scene in Back to the Future where the doc runs to Marty's garbage can and pops everything into "Le Fusion Machine." wink

Nolan_Void

Nolan_Void

Salisbury, NC
July 2004

JUL 23, 2008 06:06 AM

ardour said:
I just find it so funny that I can remember being a teenager arguing on the internet with people during the 2001 election. A big talking point was about how Al Gore wanted to kill the internal combustion engine. There was outrage. "He's going to ban SUVS! He said so in his book!" these kids were screaming. Everything that has happened since then just seemed so damn predictable.



Disheartening, isn't it, that as a kid of seventeen with your narrow and limited life experience that you could see where all of this was going, and it turned out you were right?

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

JUL 23, 2008 07:24 AM

RedBstrd said:
This situation isn't one with an easy fix.


switchgrass looks really, really good to me, but i'm certainly no expert. it's not the most efficient in terms of quantity of biomass per gallon of biofuel, but it grows where nothing else will and requires very little in the way of water or nutrients. am i missing something that makes it less awesome than it appears?

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Next

Now Hear This

Last Comment 5 HR by orbro

Now Hear This

Last Comment 5 HR

There's like a half-hour of video here. You should do a vlog. More ...

Asshole Fuckface Roundup #74

Last Comment 5 HR

Parents who are accustomed to carrying guns around may not think anything of going into child-related... More ...

An Encounter With Jonathan Shaw's Narcisa

Last Comment 6 HR

thanx gurlz... u rrrrrule!! xx jonathan shaw and narcisa More ...

SuicideGirl: Bob

Bob

Terrible Woman's MySpace Alias Leads to Teen's Suicide.

Last Comment 21 HR

But, it's delivered poorly...really poorly. Unless, it's not a joke, in which case, it's a good place... More ...

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08 by Shalome

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08

Oh my fucking god. More ...

Filtering the Truth: Religion - Friend or Foe?

Last Comment 11/30/08

I'm just going to skip over the mass orgy that's going on and say my piece: I don't think religion is... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: Lily Tomlin
SuicideGirls Interview: Mike Patton: A Perfect Place
SuicideGirls Interview: Frank Black