The Last Conservative
Feb. 7th, 2008 05:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fantastic_jackieSince Mitt Romney dropped out of the race today, I have no candidate I can fall behind. But I'm still going to be actively campaigning, and I'm still going to vote. You'll never believe who I'm voting for this year, let alone for whom I'll be volunteering.
There's also the Congress, and that's where I'll be shifting my focus.
The Presidential election is lost for me, and for the US, too: we're GOING to have a liberal democrat in office. The only question is from which party will they come.
You may count me in the, "Crush McCain" camp. Ali said, "Now you know how we feel about George Bush." No, I don't. The campaign against Bush was just "Anyone but;" I want McCain to stand absolutely no chance of winning. If we're going to have a liberal democrat in the White House, let's get one that's honest about who they are. One that doesn't attack and demonize his - or her - own base. There's more trust in the situation, and frankly, the other candidates deserve it more than he does. - Not that any of them should be POTUS.
As such, I've got a couple different options I'm playing with, and these are my choices. I will choose to vote for one of them:
A) Ron Paul
B) Write In
C) Hillary Clinton/Barak Obama (Also, fundraising/campaign volunteering)
D) The Unknown - AKA, the Third Party Candidate
Option A.
Ron Paul is the last "Conservative" left in this race. He's actually a Libertarian, and voting for him would mean putting aside a lot of my moral principals and love of the military. Because I wouldn't be voting for him for any other reason than choosing him as my candidate. If I choose to vote for him, it will only be during the Primary.
He has a lot to offer domestically. The foreign war is lost, and I don't mean the actual war. The GOP is relying on the "Anyone but Hillary" base within the party, but if Obama is the nominee, then we may as roll out the red carpet because no one can stop him; the man has charisma, vision, and motivation. As for Hillary, she's a Clinton: she's got it.
But back to Paul; assuming he had a chance to get into office (and I know he doesn't, but voting for someone implies you want them there), my purpose in voting for him would be to be as a check on excessive spendetures in the Congress and for him to be a lame duck on everything else because he wouldn't be able to pass anything with either party controlling the Congress.
Option B.
Writing in is what I want to do, but I'll only do it if I'm sure McCain is going to be thoroughly crushed. My write in would be Newt Gingrich, as he's the candidate I picked from day one. I might write in for the Primary, I might not; it depends on if I can stomach a vote for Paul.
Option C.
Yes, you read that correctly. I will be volunteering for the Democratic Party this year. I have given up hope for the next 4 years, and that is to say that I know I'll probably be extremely active politically sending letters and maybe even organizing/attending events like I have in the past. I don't think everything will change, but enough will. I'm putting my cards on a Carter/Reagan election cycle in 2012.
Taxes are going to rise: you can bet on it. Whether McCain, Clinton, or Obama, no matter what. This is going to affect the economy - negatively. Abroad, who knows, and I don't know if we'll be attacked again, either. I like to say that I have faith in the people that protect us, but it's all incumbent upon how tied their hands become. One thing's for sure, though: just because George W. Bush leaves office doesn't mean that suddenly we have no threat on our hands. The WoT doesn't end. - At least until we're forced to retreat.
So voting/campaigning for the dems is a backwards strategy, but I feel it's the only liable one that exists; I will be genuinely happy when the Dems win this year. If we're going to have a liberal in office, it should be on the party that is openly for such policies. I can and do respect Clinton and Obama as politicians; they're brilliant. McCain is a pansy. He's as Rhino as they come, and he has absolutely no respect for the Conservative principles that govern the Conservative Base of "his" party. I tell you this now: if the Republican party doesn't start shifting back to the right, I will be leaving it.
Additionally, if McCain stands the slightest chance of winning (which I doubt he will, but you never know), then I'll also vote Democrat, although living in Texas, I'm not sure how much effect that will have... ;)
Option D.
A lot of talk has popped up about a true Conservative running as a third party candidate. If such a person arises, of course dependent on who they are, I'll vote for them. I'll volunteer for them, instead, as well; spliting the Conservative vote does enough to guarantee McCain's defeat.
The last round in 2006 was about the Republican party "teaching" the GOP that we're tired of our core values being ignored. What I'm doing is not tied to petty party differences: I genuinely believe liberal principles will destroy this nation, and endorsing that destruction takes a lot of gull, especially considering how much I love the US. That being said, America is stonger than one liberal democrat in the White House. One liberal democrat in the White House will (mostly - hopefully) not affect my life too drastically: I'll still depend on myself for things. Hopefully the government's fingers won't pry too far into our lives.
As such, I've got a couple different options I'm playing with, and these are my choices. I will choose to vote for one of them:
A) Ron Paul
B) Write In
C) Hillary Clinton/Barak Obama (Also, fundraising/campaign volunteering)
D) The Unknown - AKA, the Third Party Candidate
Option A.
Ron Paul is the last "Conservative" left in this race. He's actually a Libertarian, and voting for him would mean putting aside a lot of my moral principals and love of the military. Because I wouldn't be voting for him for any other reason than choosing him as my candidate. If I choose to vote for him, it will only be during the Primary.
He has a lot to offer domestically. The foreign war is lost, and I don't mean the actual war. The GOP is relying on the "Anyone but Hillary" base within the party, but if Obama is the nominee, then we may as roll out the red carpet because no one can stop him; the man has charisma, vision, and motivation. As for Hillary, she's a Clinton: she's got it.
But back to Paul; assuming he had a chance to get into office (and I know he doesn't, but voting for someone implies you want them there), my purpose in voting for him would be to be as a check on excessive spendetures in the Congress and for him to be a lame duck on everything else because he wouldn't be able to pass anything with either party controlling the Congress.
Option B.
Writing in is what I want to do, but I'll only do it if I'm sure McCain is going to be thoroughly crushed. My write in would be Newt Gingrich, as he's the candidate I picked from day one. I might write in for the Primary, I might not; it depends on if I can stomach a vote for Paul.
Option C.
Yes, you read that correctly. I will be volunteering for the Democratic Party this year. I have given up hope for the next 4 years, and that is to say that I know I'll probably be extremely active politically sending letters and maybe even organizing/attending events like I have in the past. I don't think everything will change, but enough will. I'm putting my cards on a Carter/Reagan election cycle in 2012.
Taxes are going to rise: you can bet on it. Whether McCain, Clinton, or Obama, no matter what. This is going to affect the economy - negatively. Abroad, who knows, and I don't know if we'll be attacked again, either. I like to say that I have faith in the people that protect us, but it's all incumbent upon how tied their hands become. One thing's for sure, though: just because George W. Bush leaves office doesn't mean that suddenly we have no threat on our hands. The WoT doesn't end. - At least until we're forced to retreat.
So voting/campaigning for the dems is a backwards strategy, but I feel it's the only liable one that exists; I will be genuinely happy when the Dems win this year. If we're going to have a liberal in office, it should be on the party that is openly for such policies. I can and do respect Clinton and Obama as politicians; they're brilliant. McCain is a pansy. He's as Rhino as they come, and he has absolutely no respect for the Conservative principles that govern the Conservative Base of "his" party. I tell you this now: if the Republican party doesn't start shifting back to the right, I will be leaving it.
Additionally, if McCain stands the slightest chance of winning (which I doubt he will, but you never know), then I'll also vote Democrat, although living in Texas, I'm not sure how much effect that will have... ;)
Option D.
A lot of talk has popped up about a true Conservative running as a third party candidate. If such a person arises, of course dependent on who they are, I'll vote for them. I'll volunteer for them, instead, as well; spliting the Conservative vote does enough to guarantee McCain's defeat.
The last round in 2006 was about the Republican party "teaching" the GOP that we're tired of our core values being ignored. What I'm doing is not tied to petty party differences: I genuinely believe liberal principles will destroy this nation, and endorsing that destruction takes a lot of gull, especially considering how much I love the US. That being said, America is stonger than one liberal democrat in the White House. One liberal democrat in the White House will (mostly - hopefully) not affect my life too drastically: I'll still depend on myself for things. Hopefully the government's fingers won't pry too far into our lives.
There's also the Congress, and that's where I'll be shifting my focus.
The Presidential election is lost for me, and for the US, too: we're GOING to have a liberal democrat in office. The only question is from which party will they come.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 03:18 am (UTC)Before I was old enough to understand any of that though, I just didn't have an interest or like in politics. I thought it was boring and didn't really affect me.
When I even went to register to vote, I think I picked Republican but as I learned more and more about the politicial parties and started to form my own political beliefs, I found myself to be neither a Republican, Democrat, Conserative or Liberal. I still don't fully know what to call myself but I think I'm Independent. Because all of my political beliefs don't full under any specified category...
I did read up on Socialism and Capitalism a while back and come to find out I was more of a socialist than a capitalist. I haven't finished reading up on the two yet but basically what I gathered from my reading, the books pretty much said capitalism was all about money, money, money, money while socialism was more about helping the people. Of course I could be wrong but I didn't get a chance to finish reading/studying socialism and capitalism.
Coming back on topic though which would be this year's upcoming election. As Bush's presidency started to dwindle down, I became terrified. I don't claim to be the most knowledgeable person on the planet but seeing as how our economy is suffering (and I mean big time!)
Just today I glimsped an online article that said the American dollar has weakened so much to the point that some stores are accepting foreign currency... I had no clue we were doing THAT bad! Not only that but there are currently rumors going around that we might experience another Great Depression.
Couple that with the fact that I'm absolutely mortified and terrified that America is well on its way to becoming the next Sodom and Gomarrah or Rome and well you get the idea...
To be truthfully honest, I'm still scared about what the next four years will bring. All I want is an honest and capable leader. One that will actually try to HELP rather than HINDER our country! *sighs*
Sorry about this comment... I didn't mean to get so winded but yeah...
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 04:49 am (UTC)Socialism is not about helping people for one simple reason. No one has ever managed to create equal prosparity, so equality can only be achived by equal misery. Socialism requires elites who are above "us" in order to maintain our "equality." Captialism is about equal oprotunity, we all are offered the chance to make our own path in life.
If you want an honest president, you are stuck having to write in for your vote. Personally if I don't like my choices I plan to write in Gen Tohmmy Franks.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 07:04 am (UTC)Hoy! Someone mentioned a dude I'd completely (embarrassingly) forgotten about! I mean... I've heard the man speak. In person. Shook his hand. And his wife's. Took pictures with him, even. And I'd vote for him over Newt!!
JC Watts!! =D
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-09 12:39 am (UTC)I understand some people are not combatative at all; they're very passive and just would rather not deal. But then you end up in a state of ignorance, left only to believe what bits and pieces you hear. And you're going to have opinions on those bits and pieces. Ignore it, sure... But then people vote, as if that makes sense after not paying attention, and... Well, the only vote that really pisses me off is an uninformed vote. Because I and millions of other citizens spend time and effort getting to know the issues of our nation only to have them cancelled out by someone who just heard this or that. Whose parents were repubs/dems before them. Whose friends say it's cool to hate GWB.
And I'm not coming down on you; not at all. I just... It doesn't compute with me that you're set to vote, but then acknowledge that you don't know the issues. Obviously, you have the right to vote. But that right has a lot of responsibility behind it; people died and are dying to protect that right, and it should never, ever be abused or treated lightly. But people never think of it that way.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-09 05:20 am (UTC)I just feel really stupid right now for even opening my mouth. I'm not necessarily uninformed though. I know bits and pieces of what's going on. To be honest, I just really don't have any faith in politics because like I said earlier: To me, it seems as though all politicians only care about getting elected and then once they get into office, they forget about the people who worked so hard to support them and get them into office.
I try to keep up with the news and I try to stay informed but nine times out of ten, I'm always hearing about this politician or that politician has done something illegal or has been caught with his pants down so to speak.
My life is definitely worth protecting and so is my country. Although I admit I'm not very patriotic. Not because I'm anti-America or anything but rather, America tends to disappoint me rather than make me proud a lot of the time.
As for GWB, let me be the first to acknowledge that I used to not like him. I was a die hard anti Bush supporter but then something changed. I ended up having a change of heart. I'm not saying he's a saint or that he's perfect but he tried to do what he thought was right.
He made a few mistakes and there were a few things he did that I didn't agree with but I wasn't spewing venom at him left and right like the rest of America.
Basically it all comes down to this: Ever since I opened my mouth about this particular topic, I've felt stupid.
I still think the presidental election will be between Obama and Clinton though. Right now I'm not paying attention to the debates. When it's officially declared who will be elected to represent each party is when I'm going to start doing my homework.
I'm not so apathetic and uncaring as to just vote for anyone. And no I'm not coming down on you or being defensive either. In fact, I'm seriously thinking about deleting the other comments I made (as well as this one). I'm not one for conflict and I think that's basically what I've done: started conflict when I should have just kept quiet.
So on that note, if I have indeed started trouble or confusion, I apologize.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 06:58 am (UTC)Capitalism is about self responsibility and self reliabilty. It's put in the context of money because that's the piece of power we all have, but capitalism has much, much more to it than just money. And no, you can't blame it all on the government, nor is the government going to fix it for you. Socialism is about government dependence and keeping everyone down at the same level. Equal misery ensures equality for all on a substandard basis with no chance for ever moving up and on. And here's a secret: out of all the times it's been tried, it has NEVER succeeded.
As for the economy, *raises hand* I'm in the business. I'm by no means an expert, but we don't know a thing, and anyone who claims to know we're even in a recession, let alone depression is a sicko playing on your fears. Those rumors you're hearing? It's called hype: do you actually trust your weatherman? I mean, maybe it's because I live in Texas, but they're ALWAYS wrong. Some things they get right, but they're also repeatedly wrong! And how much do you actually care about Britany Spears' custody battle, anyway? The economy is a story the media wants to grab onto as it starts to decline. Starts. Because the past... 5 years, approximately, we've seen record growth and expansion. Record unemployment lows. Because of the tax cuts President Bush and the Republicans passed. The tax cuts the liberal democrats fought against and want to repeal.
Which, don't even go into the whole "Tax cuts for the rich!!" bit: the top 1% pays for over THIRTY-NINE PERCENT of the nation's taxes! The top 25% pays for EIGHTY-SEVEN PERCENT of the nation's taxes! And these numbers are UP since Bush took office.
So hype? Don't pay attention to it. Don't even give it a passing thought. The media wants you frenzied, and the democrats want you hopeless so that you'll reach out to them as a victim who needs saving. Conservatives, yeah, we're black and white. We look at the cold, hard facts and we make decisions based on logic rather than feeling - because we feel in our hearts it will lead to better outcomes.
Why is the economy going down? Lots of reasons, including the simple fact that *GASP!* the market goes down. It's called an adjustment, and we're long due. (See: record growth and expansion) For anyone to say that this is the next Great Depression, they're, quite frankly, idiots! They don't know anything more than anyone else; we don't even know if we're in a recession! They're hoping for the market to crash - which it hasn't! contrary to what the news may tell you - because then they'd be right! If their wrong, well... "Well, the market is always unpredictable, and this is a pleasent surprise, yatta yatta yatta."
All the candidates think they're going to help the country - in their visions. But check out their visions: is that where YOU think OUR country should go?
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 03:37 am (UTC)See, the whole stance on conservative/liberal politics is whats wrong with a two party election....I say we throw it back old skool and have our four parties.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 03:44 am (UTC)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADG448a4Qrk
:D :D
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 07:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 07:08 am (UTC)As for two way liberal/conservative, there's not a way to split those two ideologies. Republican/democrat, yes, but Libs and Cons have core principles that outline what they are. This year, though, we may very well end up with a viable third party... And with all the twists and turns this election has already taken, who can tell?
no subject
Date: 2008-02-08 02:12 pm (UTC)I just. don't. get why conservatives insist that love of military = support for the war in Iraq/war on terror. Those of us who don't support the war still love the military, you know. We hate the war because it's depleting our forces, taking unnecessary lives, and leaving us vulnerable if a crisis arises. We want to see America's military #1 just as much as the war supporters do. It's just a different perspective on things, and I really wish people would stop treating us like less-than-patriotic because we question a Very Unpopular War.
And why should you have to sacrifice your moral principles whatever candidate you fall behind? Morality isn't the government's job, nor should it be; historically, it's never really worked out, especially not in line with the core American values! They're completely at odds!
no subject
Date: 2008-02-09 01:47 am (UTC)The #1? Because men and women have died in the war, given up time with their families, lost limbs and more, a war that IS winnable and necessary, and to simply put our tails between our legs and whimper home is the most dishonorable, unappreciative, and unfaithful thing we can do for their sacrifices.
The people that are against the WoT see terrorism as a necessary evil: we trade a few thousand citizens every couple years for our freedom, and hey, that's just the way it is. Sorry, but I belive freedom is something to be defended, even abroad. And we can play Monday morning QB all day long, but based on the intelligence we had back then, it was the right decision, not to mention that Al Quaeda has made Iraq one of their [weakening] strongholds. And again, we could debate if the circumstances that led to that were right or wrong, but the fact of the matter is that that is the issue now, and Al Quaeda is our enemy in this war.
Morality isn't the government's job, nor should it be; historically, it's never really worked out, especially not in line with the core American values! They're completely at odds!
Our Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution and established this nation never believed that morality was irrelevant to its governing! Morality and Christianity ARE American core values. And that doesn't make us a theocracy; no one is forced to believe in God nor attend church every Sunday. No one wants that. But we have our roots and simply denying them doesn't mean they cease to exist.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-09 02:46 am (UTC)And what of the many, many military families and members of the military who support Ron Paul and the other anti-war candidates? Are they disloyal for questioning not the military, but the government that commands the military? I appreciate our military's sacrifices; I hate that they had to make them because our government screwed up.
Sorry, but I belive freedom is something to be defended, even abroad.
But we've lost freedoms to defend freedom. They haven't had to attack us again for us to sacrifice liberties for the fear of another attack. I'm all about a good defense -- but the best defense isn't always a good offense.
The hostilities al Quaeda have toward us are not as simple as they hate our freedoms and they hate our way of life. They are hostile toward us because we can't. keep. our. noses. out. of. the. Middle. East. And we're hypocrites about it! Most of the 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia and we're best buds with Saudi Arabia because we want their friggin' oil. We're not trying to spread Democracy to them and they're more hard-core than Iraq!
And fine -- if we wanted to depose Saddam Hussein for his crimes against humanity, then that's noble -- but even if that were the case, we still should have hesitated to take out their infrastructure without really understanding the centuries-old lines drawn between groups of people there. When Cheney was the Defence Secretary he even said it would be a quagmire to invade Iraq!
But what about the genocide every day in Africa? We're not overthrowing governments over there! We leave the poor Africans to fend for themselves: because they are not a threat to us, nor are they of economic interest to us. Unlike the Middle East. And the Clinton Administration was ripped for sending troops to Kosovo...
Our Founding Fathers who wrote the Constitution and established this nation never believed that morality was irrelevant to its governing! Morality and Christianity ARE American core values.
Of course they didn't. But morality isn't strictly rooted in religion, though, which I talked about on your other thread, and the moral laws that do protect citizens and maintain law and order in this country are already in place -- perhaps too much in place in some cases. I might believe something is immoral, but that doesn't mean it has to be illegal. It's a waste of government resources to have to police personal moral issues that aren't infringing on other people's way of life. It's unnecessary big government.
And again, it's the Church's business to spread Biblical morality -- government has just become the Church's crutch because there are a lot of issues we're afraid to tackle head-on -- like the issue of homosexuality. The Church still isn't really comfortable dealing with hetereosexual issues, so now that homosexuality is open in our culture, the Church panics and tries to get the government to make Constitutional amendments about marriage so that we won't have to look at what we don't want to look at.
Jesus didn't have much to say about the government. He told people to pay their taxes to Caesar -- and I don't think anyone would dispute that American culture has nothing on the immorality of the Roman Empire. Jesus' ministry was about having dinner with prostitutes and other sinners. It was far more effective than any government could ever hope to be.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-12 06:44 pm (UTC)They have more right than anyone to dissent. At the same time, what of those who are in the miltary and their families who both support the war and know that we're winning and that it's worth it? What? Do we enjoy the the sacrifice or something? It's fun to worry when that scheduled checkpoint doesn't happen for days on end? To know the faces and characters of the men and women that don't return? Should we openly embrace their deaths as meaningless in a battle we know we can win and think absolutely nothing of it?
But we've lost freedoms to defend freedom.
What freedoms have you lost in conjunction with the War on Terror and the Bush Administration? This is a line that's always being repeated again, and yet, I've yet to see a single person list even ONE freedom that they've lost, let alone multiple.
They are hostile toward us because we can't. keep. our. noses. out. of. the. Middle. East.
9/11 was our fault, of couse. And the USS Cole. And the embassy bombings. And the first Trade Center bombings. All the way back into the 70s in Jimmy Carter's Administration: justified retaliation. Against civilians. 9/11 was just the "chickens coming home to roost." Things are never as simple as good and evil... Jealousy, brainwashing by dictatorships, our ally in Isreal, and a violent religion have absolutely nothing to do with their Jihad against us, I'm sure.
Most of the 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia and we're best buds with Saudi Arabia because we want their friggin' oil.
Oi, we're not the party to blame for that, you know. We're not allowed to dig for our own oil due to all the environmentalist wacko red tape, and a new refinery hasn't been opened in the US since the 1970s. We have no shortage of oil; we have a shortage of refineries. Thank the liberal hippies for that; we're the ideology that's continually pushing for independence from foreign oil, and considering how dependent we are on oil in this country, it's no wonder we didn't go after them first. We have so much oil in this country, but we can't even explore it.
And the Clinton Administration was ripped for sending troops to Kosovo...
He was ripped because the United States military is not a peace corp! That's the UN's job! The reason we went into Iraq was because we perceived them as a threat because as to our knowledge and pathetic intel (agian, thank the Clinton administration for that; they cut the intelligence agencies and US military so far back that they were boardering on inept! The two intel agencies weren't even allowed to talk to each other becuase of what Clinton did!) that they were producing WMD. I STILL wonder why Saddam, if he was so innocent with nothing to hide, didn't respond when it was clear that we were serious. Why kick the UN inspectors out and obviously hide things if they weren't up to something? But that's speculaltion. Changing Iraq into a democracy was part of a comprehensive strategy in the WoT. Because free people aren't subjected to indoctrination without recourse, and freedom from that indoctrination is the only way to eliminate the generational hatred for America in that region.
It's a waste of government resources to have to police personal moral issues that aren't infringing on other people's way of life. It's unnecessary big government.
We already agree on this issue; laws can't give God people's hearts. I think one of the stupidest laws I've ever heard of was the law against sodomy. I didn't even know it had existed until I read about it being struck down, and Justice Thomas put it best in his separate opinion. ;)
no subject
Date: 2008-02-12 07:18 pm (UTC)I think this is ridiculous and I'm not even going to continue a debate here because it's not even a debate -- it's just name-calling and hyperbole.
What freedoms have you lost in conjunction with the War on Terror and the Bush Administration? This is a line that's always being repeated again, and yet, I've yet to see a single person list even ONE freedom that they've lost, let alone multiple.
I know exactly what you'll say to this, that it's a right I should be willing to give up, but I'm not willing to give up something so basic which has nothing to do with keeping us safe from terrorists: every time I fly on an airplane I have to remove a jacket, a cardigan, my shoes, my belt, every bit of jewelery I'm wearing, and run it through a machine. If I happen to have a bottle of water on me, it will get confiscated. I have seen women and children pulled out of line and frisked. And we won't even go into the racial profiling. Terror aims to make people so scared that they will give up the smallest thing. Everything snowballs from there. And it's freaking stupid.
Because free people aren't subjected to indoctrination without recourse, and freedom from that indoctrination is the only way to eliminate the generational hatred for America in that region.
By subjecting them to our will and indocrinating them with our ideas?
So many Iraqi civilians have died in this war! It's one thing for people to die for their own freedom, but we imposed this on them! They're people. Revolution has to come from within. And when do we know it's done? When they've completely given up their religion and their differences and look just like us? What if that never happens? Or what if it appears to, we leave, and then they degenerate into this same sectarian violence again, and more innocent lives are lost?
We're not allowed to dig for our own oil due to all the environmentalist wacko red tape, and a new refinery hasn't been opened in the US since the 1970s. We have no shortage of oil; we have a shortage of refineries. Thank the liberal hippies for that;
You know, if you want to be taken seriously, you really ought to stop using terms like "environmentalist wacko" and "liberal hippies". You can respectfully disagree with people without resorting to trite name-calling.
The answer to the problem is that we stop using oil. :)
I'm done.