Dave Ewoldt’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Putting aside the fact that we should be using much less in the way of fossil fuel, regardless of source, I don't know if I'd rely on the NY Times to be able to point me toward a democratic government. Yeah, Citgo gas isn't local (although the store ownership is), but I sure don't see Obama giving me even as much help as Chavez is giving his people.

  Comments like that only detract from the veracity of Grist. Please be more careful.

  On 'Localwashing' in pictures -- bogus marketing at its finest posted 2 months ago 32 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Of course a realistic carbon reduction bill won't get passed with the focus shifted. The majority of the left isn't even willing to admit the "health care" plan being offered by Obusha doesn't actually change anything from the dysfunctional system we currently have. All it does is provide a few more victims for it at taxpayer expense. The profiteers continue to get their cut.
  
  The Kleptocracy...Monetocracy...whatever term you prefer for the dominator elite who will do everything they can to protect the class hierarchy and their position at the top of it...have thrown the left YetAnotherDistraction which the left, as always, went for because the left is just as afraid of the necessary change as those who continue to profit from not changing.
  
  The controlling mythology is that capitalism, profit, and economic growth in general must be protected at all costs. And we're about to find out what "at all costs" really entails.
  
  Pentagon planners, Wall Street financiers, etc. know exactly where our current rate of collapse from catastrophic climate destabilization, resource depletion, and overall biospheric toxicity from Industrialism is taking us. But they think there's still more profit that can be squeezed out of the system, and refuse to let themselves admit that once collapse occurs all their money won't mean a thing. The sad truth, the one that is too awful to face, is it's the only game plan they have. As has been pointed out by many others, there is no Plan B.
  
  And they've developed such mastery at offering distractions. Health care is such an emotional issue. Our Mad Max future if we don't change direction is still more ephemeral than asthma, cancer and all the other negative by-products of industrialism. We can't see ecosystems collapsing, but we can see hospital emergency rooms filling up. And of course corporate media ensures we all remain as confused as possible. Torture memos. FBI... err, I mean terrorist... plots to blow up America. Which silicon enhanced starlet is carrying who's baby. Etc ad nauseum.
  
  So, I guess the bottom line is we (the Left) really are as stupid as the elites assume us to be. We have fooled ourselves into thinking that the health care issue will be the foot in the door (the red pill) we've been looking for to wake people up to what they really should be concerned about.
  
  Neither energy nor greenhouse gases will be addressed realistically as long as the left continues to allow themselves to be so blatantly manipulated. The so-called partisanship in Congress is just another convenient distraction that helps us not have to face reality. We have Republican obstructionism to blame inaction on.
  
  If, on the other hand, we were to adopt sustainability as our overarching goal, we could simultaneously address health, the environment, and turn democracy around from the fantasy role it currently occupies.

  On Will health care eclipse climate in Congress this year? posted 5 months ago 9 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Environmentalists happy? Ecologists still sad!

  Well, I guess Obama might make environmentalists happy, but ecologists aren't likely to see any changes other than increased lip service to science, or rather scientism, which has been one of the core problems since the human quest for knowledge became derailed during the Enlightenment.

  Obama is quite adept at talking out of both sides of his mouth. Which is, I admit, an improvement over shrub the lessor who couldn't talk out of either side. Obama wants to continue our addiction to cars and sprawl. He wants people to think that we can power the economic growth that is overconsuming the planet with clean, renewable energy.

  I hate to be the one to break it to you folks at Grist, but catastrophic climate destabilization has contributing factors besides burning fossil fuel.

  What Obama is proposing is neither change nor leadership. It is cheerleading for the status quo.
  

  Peace _on_ Earth requires peace _with_ Earth.

  On Obama references energy, climate challenges in inaugural address posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago 13 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Let's move beyond status quo thinking

  Another argument to maintain the status quo, spoken like a true free-market fundamentalist (or pro-business Democrat, not that there's a significant difference). According to Roberts, in the choice of whether or not we pass on a habitable planet to future generations, saving political capital is the prime consideration.

  If the choice is to continue supporting an economic system based primarily on financial incentives (which I would argue against), then we should at least demand full cost accounting that is spread amongst both producers and consumers. Consumers should pay for their choices in the marketplace through taxes, and producers should have subsidies removed as well as be required to pay reasonable costs for the resources removed from the commons, for other environmental and social damages, and for end of life cycle costs for their products.

  The argument for infrastructure change to protect automobile induced sprawl is also little more than status quo thinking. As Hirsch, Hansen and so many others point out, we don't have the time for that even if it were a good idea.

  If price at the pump reflected full costs, gasoline would be $12-$15/gal. Anything less than this is merely whistling past the graveyard.

  At the very least, gas taxes and realistic resource rents to oil producers should be used to fund high-speed intercity rail and the redesign of walkable cities.

  Peace _on_ Earth requires peace _with_ Earth.

  On Why taxes can't get us where we need to go on transportation posted 11 months, 3 weeks ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Emanuel and green in the same sentence?

  Rahm Emanuel has a respectable green record? C'mon boys and girls, it's time to shake off the consensus trance and start learning how to connect the dots. A pro-industry, pro-growth agenda is the opposite of green.

  Emanuel was responsible for ramming NAFTA down our throats for Clinton. In fact, when you look at who Obama has surrounded himself with, the new administration is poised to become Clinton 2.0. While this might be a kinder, gentler form of domination and imperialism, it isn't going to provide the fundamental help our suffering planet or her children desperately need.
  

  Peace _on_ Earth requires peace _with_ Earth.

  On Emanuel, tapped as Obama's chief of staff, has a respectable green record posted 12 months ago 5 Responses