Red but mostly a blue Monday

Wanting to touch on more than just the energy industry, I'd like to digress and discuss politics, for just a second.

Thomas Edison said once that not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. I feel sometimes the average American just doesn't count to these big head politico machines.

The major media outlets and their political cohorts on both sides of the aisle are pushing the smaller guy out the window, saying what they say just doesn't count. Why? What makes them count less than the other, big name pandering pool of political pinheads pushing their party's plan?

There is too much talk and not enough action. Too many pundits. Too many talking idiotic heads on 24 hour news channels pushing entertainment and not journalistic integrity.

Why can't someone offer a decent answer to a question?

The answer, quite frankly, is, the decent questions that count aren't being asked.

That is all I have to say. If given the opportunity to ask the candidates one question, it would run along the lines of:

Why is the country handcuffing ourselves when it comes to domestic energy production, yet all rhetoric surrounds "energy security" and "energy independence" in addition to "reducing emissions"?

At this point in our world, you can't possibly have one without affecting the other.

Energy independence You want to stop imports of oil from the Middle East and elsewhere around the world? Well the people need to push for more domestic drilling and expansion of all energy production projects. AND NO MORE TAXES!
Energy security You want to have cheap, affordable energy without supply interruptions? Well then the people need to use less and make sacrifices.
Reducing emissions You want a world without carbon emissions? Impossible, but the people can try if they stop breathing.

I actually enjoyed what the GM exec Bob Lutz said about global warming, that it's a "crock of shit." Fantastic. Finally, someone saying it like it is.

But what is lost in the muck is the second part of what he said: "I'm motivated more by the desire to replace imported oil than by the CO2 [argument]."

Basically, the guy is saying that in order for me to run my company successfully and make money, he is more driven by what the market desires, i.e. a more economical car. He knows that rising gasoline prices and the desire of the people to demand a car that can move from point A to point B in a more fuel efficient manner will sell cars, not by the hot air about trying to combat global warming.

Does what Lutz said count?

What counts more for you? That ever-increasing dent in your wallet thanks to skyrocketing energy prices, or the slight potential that the byproduct of your energy usage may increase the world's temperature 1 degreee?