question the leader

Ok, so I am at the point of another political rant. You've been forewarned.

Hurricane Katrina has brought to light a number of policies that the Bush Administration has put into effect and now they are coming back to bite the US in the you-know-where. I'm not in the country and with the limited exposure I get to US media (CNN International) I can see the tremendous tragedy that has and is continuing to unfold in places like New Orleans and Baton Rouge. After talking with my parents the other day, I found that the deluge of rain was miniscule in comparison to the amount of media coverage this event is receiving. Yet with the limited amount of knowledge that I am getting, I can see the problems.

There are so many problems here that you can't even cover them all, so I'll hit on the major ones that stick out for me at the moment.

First - troops in Iraq. Bush went off and invaded Iraq despite what the international community suggested; he had a 'slam dunk'. Well, we all know the quagmire that is Iraq and 30 months later, it doesn't look much better. But what does that have to do with the hurricane? In an attempt to put more troops where they were needed, members of the National Guard were put on active duty and sent over to Iraq to help maintain order. Well guess what? The National Guardsmen from Louisiana and other southern states are over there rather than being at home. Now that the state needs them, they are half a world away. Hmmm, good deployment of troops there Dubya. And why shouldn't I hold him responsible? He is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

Second - energy policy. Bush came out yesterday and delivered a strong message to the world - we are gluttons. The US supply of oil isn't enough to meet our own needs and now that it is temporarily shut down, we REALLY need help from outside. GW "asked" Saudi Arabia to boost its oil production to meet the needs of the US during this crisis. Read between the lines here folks - give us a lot of cheap oil because we support the house of Saud and without our support, the monarchy could fall. The energy policy that has been in place over the last 20 years has been atrocious and Bush has only exacerbated the problem with some of his policies. A sidebar if I may...

In the early 1980s, the country was just getting over the last oil crisis of the 70s and that concern was on the minds of the major auto manufacturers in the US. They knew that they were going to need to spend billions of dollars in R&D to develop the next generation of cars. They could've spent it on developing 'alternative' sources such as hydrogen-fuel cells but chose not to. Rather they spent it on making cars slightly more fuel efficient, perpetuating the fossil fuel obsession. Why? The Reagan Administration is in power at the time. George Bush (Sr.) is the VP and has a large investment in the oil industry (as does his son). Bush Sr. pushes through economic incentives to keep the auto industry focused on fossil fuel engines. With this carrot being dangled, the decision was made. As the years go by, the cars get bigger and heavier for some bizarre reason. Since when does the average family NEED an off-road vehicle with a monster engine to drive around town to shop and take kids to soccer practice? But back to the energy policy.

Bush's rejection of the Kyoto Accord and subsequent tax breaks for SUV drivers has further propelled the dependence on foreign oil. Americans must get oil from other source because they don't want to change their way of life. What should be done is to take a page from the Europeans and drive smaller cars. At least the dollar spent on petrol would go farther. And why not do as the Dutch do and tax the absolute crap out of petrol and vehicles on the road? Maybe then more money could be raised for things that really matter, like education, eliminating poverty, and healthcare.

What really needs to happen is for America to take a good look at its leader(s) and start thinking of the future. Unfortunately, Bush was elected on the premise of fear (terrorism) and maintenance of the status quo. But as anyone can tell you, looking to maintain the present only leads to disaster in the future. Preparing for the future will make the present a better place.

So America, where do we want to go from here? Do we want to continue to be the world leader? Is military might the end-all and be-all of being a leader? Or is being a leader more akin to developing technology to reduce pollution, finding cures for diseases, and feeding the hungry? Being a leader isn't easy. Ask any leader - even Bush - its hard to do. With great power comes great responsibility, isn't it time we started being responsible?