Attn: College Republicans-ChickenHawks

After the protest the US Army recruiting office is just around the corner at 1800 Post Road, Warwick

There are half a dozen College Republicans in the national guard.

Just because I am opposed to cancer, it does not mean that I have to be an oncologist.

The College Republicans pick up where the former administration left off: on a great note!

Jim

Over 25,000 college kids in RI ?
a half dozen GOP kids are in the national guard....wow

about 100 Gays and lesbians have been thrown out of the Rhode Island National
Guard...since 09/11/2001
Go Figure

You support abortion, so why haven't you had one?

Do you not support our action in Afghanistan? If you do, why aren't you there?

And if not, any further discussion is pointless, because you're clearly brainwashed.

I think it's great that the college kids get into protests and all that, but as a proud Republican, I'd be more happy if they'd take the advice of a late Democrat: "All politics is local". If you want to protest, go after our General Assembly. Our party has lots of great candidates running for office and each face a huge uphill climb. Rather than getting together and protesting in some way that probably ain't gonna change Langevin's opinion, volunteer for one of these local Assembly campaigns. Help get more Republicans into the state office. Work in a positive way to shape the discussions and policies in RI. Put all that youthful energy into a local campaign and make a real difference. Thanks!

Geezer, I agree strongly with your point about the impact of participating in the campaign of a candidate you support.

However, as a one time event, this protest would not really supplant campaign activity. At the same time, it is one important way that a voter can convey his or her view on a subject to an elected official and/or express disagreement with that official's stance. (I've appended the post with another method.)

I guess I think there are bigger fish to fry than this.

Not being an avid supporter of more drilling - not due to some over zealous love fest with the earth - but more concerned that if one of the largest issues we'll face in the 21st century is energy, we need to spend our time supporting alternative energy resources.

So I'm unconvinced that more drilling will net us the resources that will sustain us and lower energy prices in the long run. Perhaps I am not as well versed to the benefits of more drilling, but day by day I'm becoming more convinced our reliance on oil is going to be our achilles heel in the future.

Have the RI College Republicans ever participated in an event that wasn't the political equivalent of group masturbation?

How about doing something productive? Something wacky that didn't make you (and us by proxy) look like idiots and assholes?

How about volunteering to clean up a playground or build a house or do something civic minded? Something that gets your names in the paper for all the RIGHT reasons? Pointlessly prancing around in circles with placards is behavior we expect from the morons like Crowley and his thugs.

Of course it really doesn't matter since there's only five of you.

Greg, you know as well as I do that charity work doesn't sell newspapers. Have you heard about all of Don Carceri's philantropy in any local news outlet? Me either.

But I agree, the College Republicans need to stop such displays that do nothing but make them look like toolbags, especially when their ranks are less than impressive.

Don, it will be our Achilles heel, mainly because we are dependent on it yet demand for it around the world is growing.

Of course, we should turn to alternates. I will be breaking out the champagne as fast as the Sierra Club when it is developed, in part because we will have put certain Middle East governments, with their charming systems of justice and democracy and enlightened attitude towards 50% of their population (i.e., women), out of business. But the alternates are not here yet. At this point, they all have serious limitations, the biggest being cost.

When you listen to what environmentalists say, their plan seems to be, if we could just make oil go away today, tomorrow the wonderful alternative fuel supply will appear. I'm not sure hw realistic this is. Even from the time that the alternative fuel is found, there may well be some transition time needed as infrastructure is converted.

As demand for oil continues to grow and with it the price of oil due to supply and speculation, until the alternates arrive, why shouldn't we, who possess a considerable supply of it, help bring down the price by tapping it, while simultaneously depriving some fairly hideous dictatorships around the world of some revenue?

Wouldn't it be faster and easier to just repeal the Enron loophole that made McCain and Bush's friends all SUPER rich speculating on oil? But we won't do that. That wouldn't be good for the rich people so the Congressional Republicans have no interest in it.

How does protesting Congressional Democrats non-energy policy make someone look like an idiot? People have a right to be involved in Federal decision making, just as much as they have a right to be involved with state and local government decision making. The Federal government isn't some infallible panel of wizards with knowledge of the deep magic that we mere mortals can't comprehend, and government in this country does not work on the principle of electing a government into place, and then silently accepting whatever they do without question -- no matter what either the Progressives or the Rockefeller Republican managerialists (like the one in the White House) say. If that's the kind of government you want, then move to Zimbabwe.

Energy policy is one of the most important areas this country faces right now, and for both the citizens and elected officials to point out that Congress is shirking their duty by not taking the subject up with any urgency is very much a sign of civic health.

And though there may be some legitimacy to the Enron loophole issue, closing it isn't going to reduce the skyrocketing oil demand from India and China, so Congressional Democrats need to make their position known: are they in favor more domestic energy production and actually getting behind alternative at some point (like repealing the tariff on Brazilian ethanol, supporting nuclear and wind power) or do they believe that America should simply accept less energy, less mobility, and less freedom to live their lives. Not letting Congress dodge on this issue is a perfectly legitimate form of public expression.

BTW, the College Democrats should be protesting right next to the Republicans- it's Democrats that refuse to act on an issue that I'm sure many CD's care deeply about.

"like repealing the tariff on Brazilian ethanol"

(gasp) How would we face Iowa voters?

I have a reasonable solution. We contract with Cuba for its sugar cane then refine the sugar into an ethanol based product. U.S. capital could invest in a refinery (on Guantanamo for example?). This keeps corn for food, employs the resources of Cuba and The United States in a joint venture that would profit both countries and go a long way towards establishing a peaceful coexistence between neighbors.

It's such a natural that it will never happen. However, I'm afraid that blind prejudices trump reason and that fear kills hope.

Also no politician has the cajones to dare even say it.
OldTimeLefty

How exactly will this vote they are demanding "bring relief to the American people" as they claim?

I assume they mean the potential 8 cent per gallon relief starting sometime in the decade of the 2020s that is the best case scenario if we develop all of the off shore resources in the US plus all of the resources at ANWAR?

Is that the "relief" they are talking about? Another meaningless stunt utterly divorced from substance. The College Republicans remain the only group in existence that annoys me more than the College Democrats.

So far the only good reason I've heard NOT to drill is that it won't bring relief RIGHT NOW.

So what?

It will wean us from paying terrorists for THEIR oil EVENTUALLY while we frantically work on hydrogen cars and electric cars and ceramic engines that were engineered and perfected in 1987 and buried away in a vault somewhere... That's good enough for me.

Greg,

That's all fine, but it's more than a bit disingenuous to first tug at the emotions about the plight of the average consumer today, and then claim that this bill will provide "relief".

One could make the argument that action now will disrupt the futures market driving prices down today.

I say fix the Enron loophole and you can accomplish the same thing. But nobody in Congress seems to want to do that or they would have by now.