When Liberal Notions are Lashed to Conservative Ideas

The W, Rove and Co are experts at propaganda. You have got to hand it to them there. They have built a stellar catapult for that. Another of their strengths is their ability to use the bully pulpit to paint wide swaths of good individuals as bad, or even more slanderously, as traitorous, treasonous, non-patriots. But beyond the lies, the mismanagement (otherwise known as presidential malpractice), the shoddy responses to numerous national and personal disasters, the W, Rove and Co's slippery, and I would suggest sleazy, political strategy really works to trick people into supporting things that they ordinarily wouldn't.

Take for example, today's presidential radio address. Here we see the president spending more money on another new initiative - and they say they are for small, not big government. Really, let's be honest here. What the W, Rove and Co is really all about is small government that helps ordinary people and big government that benefits them and their pals in whatever industry they are trying to prop up. Which leads to another question aside: Why can't repulicans hold their own to their tirelessly espoused and documented standards, ethics and morals?

All that aside, what the W, Rove and Co works to do is lift up an otherwise very bad idea (supposedly conservative) by lashing it to several high minded, and fairly - dare I type it - liberal notions. But if you look at where the president is saying he will appropriate the funds, you see that one is part of the real agenda. The rest is fluff to make that expense look good.

When you read through the slice below, ask yourself why nuclear power? Why not 120 million of solar power advancements and another 120 million for wholly green vehicles leaving another 10 million for research on new technologies that don't leave toxic residue? Or for that matter, why is W not forcing legislation that pushes a higher MPG in the CAFE standards - which doesn't take any additional taxpayer dollars at all?

To meet these challenges, my Administration has announced a bold new proposal called the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. Under this partnership, America will work with nations that have advanced civilian nuclear energy programs, such as France, Japan, and Russia. Together, we will develop and deploy innovative, advanced reactors and new methods to recycle spent nuclear fuel. This will allow us to produce more energy, while dramatically reducing the amount of nuclear waste and eliminating the nuclear byproducts that unstable regimes or terrorists could use to make weapons.

As these technologies are developed, we will work with our partners to help developing countries meet their growing energy needs by providing them with small-scale reactors that will be secure and cost-effective. We will also ensure that these developing nations have a reliable nuclear fuel supply. In exchange, these countries would agree to use nuclear power only for civilian purposes and forego uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities that can be used to develop nuclear weapons. My new budget includes $250 million to launch this initiative. By working with other nations under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, we can provide the cheap, safe, and clean energy that growing economies need, while reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation.

As we expand our use of nuclear power, we're also pursuing a broader strategy to meet our energy needs. We're investing in technologies like solar and wind power and clean coal to power our homes and businesses. We're also investing in new car technologies like plug-in hybrid cars and in alternative fuels for automobiles like ethanol and biodiesel.

If you are really going to "invest" in solar, wind and other clean/green energies, it wouldn't be on the same list as coal and it would have a dollar figure attached as an appropriation, no? But, I guess that is what happens when liberal notions are lashed to conservative ideas: Follow the money, not the rhetoric. It tells the whole story.