Un-Treehugger: Quote by US Senator Chuck Grassley
by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 11.19.05
We try to keep things positive around here and leave it to others to report the negative stories, but once in a while we read something that gives us brain cramps and that has to be mentioned out of some kind of morbid fascination. This quote by Iowa senator Charles "Chuck" Grassley is a prime example of not getting it. He said: "You know what? What makes our economy grow is energy. And Americans are used to going to the gas tank (sic), and when they put that hose in their, uh, tank, and when I do it, I wanna get gas out of it. And when I turn the light switch on, I want the lights to go on, and I don't want somebody to tell me I gotta change my way of living to satisfy them. Because this is America, and this is something we've worked our way into, and the American people are entitled to it, and if we're going improve (sic) our standard of living, you have to consume more energy." via ::Clusterfuck Nation, ::Official US Senate Grassley Website
He is right. That is what we want.
BUT
What happens when there isn't any gasoline in the ground to pump into your tank?
What happens when there isn't any electricity flowing into the house?
We know the problems we had before/during/after Katrina/Wilma. What then, Senator? Another question:
What would you do to PREVENT these problems from happening?
Bill (Rhode Island)
What bugs me the most about his statement is that he's advocating burrying our heads in the sand while thinking that somehow the planet owes us something ("entitled") and that the reason for conservation, efficiency and clean-energy are to please "some people" and not to actually save our own asses (along with other living creatures).
In short, he doesn't get it.
and if we're going improve (sic) our standard of living, you have to consume more energy."
This guy doesn't understand efficiency. I have heard similar statements from other Republican talking heads like Limbaugh. 4 flourecent lights in my room last longer and use the same amount of energy as 1 traditional light bulb. I added insulation to my house and now pay less money on my heating/cooling bill and have a more comfortable house. Switch to diesel and get more MPG and greater torque. Sounds like I just improved my standard of living by being more efficient and not using more energy. Do Republicans like Senator Chuck Grassley understand the definition of "conservative"?
He doesn't know his Grassley from his elbow.
US Senator Grassley needs to understand global warming means people who were 18 in 2000 will not live out their life expectancy and are the last generation if we do nothing to slow down global warming. The oceans no longer function well as sink basins for C02, the troposphere is rising as human beings pump C02 into the atmosphere, and the Amazon rainforest releases huge amounts of C02 into the atmosphere as UV from the sun hits land cleared by deforestation while the stratosphere is thinning. This means Senator Grassley's own children and grandchildren will not have a sustainable atmosphere or climate to maintain their own health to live until for their own life expectancy. Five star resorts and gated communities do not provide a different atmosphere or agriculture for the top one percent! Perhaps Senator Grassley should rethink the tax break for up to $100,000 for people who drive cars more than 6,000 lbs to work 50% of the time or more. Grassley’s children and grandchildren are going to ask him serious questions about the policies he has voted for once they realize they are the last generation and the clock can’t be turned back.
MGR, this was my thought exactally. He is encouraging people to keep turning on those light switches and driving those cars. But it will be a real eye opener when their economies best friend energy dissipates into nothing.
That's when we Europeans sometimes think that Americans are pompous, arrogant, and plain stupid idiots.
It's sad but it's also hard to believe there are intelligent creatures in that continent as well, but I do believe. Unfortunately they don't voice themself as loud as they should.
I think the direction the lot of us are going to have to take in order to get through to blowhards like this is essentially: "screw the environment, this will save everyone money and make us less dependent on foreign oil"
These people don't care about the environment. In fact, to them being an environmentalist means that you support a dwindling economy and a loss in quality of life. They can oppose rhetoric, but they can't oppose math. The pitch should be: "conserving a watt is cheaper than producing one and your quality of life doesn't change at all" or something to that effect. "But what about global warming!?!" will only fall on deaf ears.
One point: While most evangelicals are actually pretty good on the environment, there is a radical, far right group of them who believe that god will replenish the earth so we can do whatever we want with it. I don't know if Grassley holds to this, but I know Bush does. Also as a side note: when a bunch of disabled people were protesting on the Hill in September, Grassley wanted the police to wait until after the office closed to arrest them. So they could all spend the night in jail. Awesome! He's also a freemason. Weird.