Another "domestic variety Southern redneck" said it far better that I ever could. The name of this song is "Political Science", but I've renamed it:

"Ballad for Wouter"

No one likes us-I don't know why
We may not be perfect, but heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the big one and see what happens

We give them money-but are they grateful?
No, they're spiteful and they're hateful
They don't respect us-so let's surprise them
We'll drop the big one and pulverize them

Asia's crowded and Europe's too old
Africa is far too hot
And Canada's too cold
And South America stole our name
Let's drop the big one
There'll be no one left to blame us

We'll save Australia
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo
We'll build an All American amusement park there
They got surfin', too

Boom goes London and boom Paris
More room for you and more room for me
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town
Oh, how peaceful it will be
We'll set everybody free
You'll wear a Japanese kimono
And there'll be Italian shoes for me

They all hate us anyhow
So let's drop the big one now
Let's drop the big one now

- Randy Newman

Whattya think o' that Wouter!

Those of you interested in more of the genius of Randy Newman can go here:

http://www.sing365.com/music/archiv...Reviews/0C62BA2F3BFC539248256ED4002934EF

yup, typical republican... anyone who doesn't agree with them they threaten violence..

The song is supposed to be satirical! Come on! Laugh a little!

And they are trying to convince us that a nuclear Iran is an unacceptable risk.

Wouter

(lets see how you come back on that one)

Wouter,
Do you think that a nuclear Iran IS an acceptable risk?

Wouter:

Try the Randy Newman link I provided; I think you will find his wit nearly as acerbic as your own. If you go there, look up the lyrics to "Lousiana", they are particularly apropse and wrtitten by "domestic variety Southern redneck".

In the U.S. we have laws protecting freedom of speech; in Iran I think they just cut off your head! And with nuclear weapons who knows!?

I fear that in a short time you may have reason to ask the Danes there opinion in these matters.

Perhaps this might be better discussed outside a sailing forum.

How about going over to www.web.co.uk ? Catsailor.com is a sailing forum where we talk about sailing, and cat sailing in particular.

(Rick, if you don't approve of me linking off site, please remove it, or let me know and I'll remove it.)

Who is this "we" you speak of!?


...thanks for the great link Scooby!

Yeah, I also don't want this crap on a sailing forum. If I wanted to hear of one's political agenda or opinion, I'd turn on CNN or the like. You guys are really starting to piss off quite a few of us that come here for sailing. Let it go, or get out!

Political debate doesn't bother me as long as it is on a thread like this that specifically states the intention. Threads are like radio stations, and if you don't like a station's content, you just don't tune in. Personally, I find it kind of interesting to hear how sailors in various parts of the world feel about political situations.

What annoys me is politics sprouting up in the middle of a thread about sailing.

P.S. I don't have a clue how the forum administrator feels about it.

Iran is the worlds fourth largest oil producer. Globally, there is very little spare oil production capacity. Any action against Iran which caused Iran and/or countries sympathetic to Iran to reduce oil production would send oil prices sky high. As with the Saudi oil embargo in the 70's, this would be very disruptive to world economies. Iran knows this, which is why they are feeling so bold about the nuclear issue.

So, when talking about acceptable risk consider: Is our extreme dependence on imported oil an acceptable risk? Let's hope President Bush means what he said in his State of the Union Address and does something about it.

More info at - http://www.energybulletin.net/12751.html

My apologizes to Matt and any others disturbed by any posts I placed in the "monohull/mutihull" thread.

But not in this one!

I think this is a double-edged argument that may be our salvation.

We have a significant domestic reserve, if we act NOW, rather that later in developing energy alternatives, that reserve can see us through! At this time a kind of parity exists, we need their oil, they need our money. That will not be so much longer, particularly in view of growth in the Chinese economy.

btw- this is very sailing related, you can't drive to the beach if there ain't no gas!

Of course he doesn't mean it. If he meant it, he would talk about energy conservation as a priority first, not just about alternative ways of domestic production, wouldn't he?
Lipservice to voters in the conservative base who are genuinly concerned with energy dependence / global warming.

Catius:

Indeed, everything will be alright! Ol' W maybe counitng me as part of his "conservative base", but I see nothing conservative about paying lipservice to this energy problem and allowing the Country to go down the drain!

We can, and should, do much more than conserve, lots of hope here: http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/solar.html

This is only part of the solution, but it is a significant part.

Catius:

Even lipservice can be helpful when it's the president talking: (Investors are Tilting Towards Windmills - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/15/business/15electric.html)

The gist of the article is that GE is actually making a profit in its wind energy business (wind energy - another weak link back to sailing), and that investors are starting to take alternative energy more seriously.

It doesn't constitute the crash program for energy independence that some would like to see, including Representative Bartlett (R. Maryland), but it's a start.

****.

Are you talking about increasing the minimum MPG requirement for new cars to 40? (Because you'll have to pry the keys of my 12mpg baby out of my cold, dead hands buddy )

What do you suggest the detroit auto makers do to increase the mileage on their trucks and SUV's to 40mpg? Hybrid? Diesel?

Either way, its going to cost *someone* a lot of investment to implement that change in such a short amount of time.

I don't see any reason to NOT tap domestic resources for oil while new measures are planned and implemented for auto makers to prepare for. I'm all for oil rigs off the coast of NC! They make things interesting for navigation

Good words to hear! Maybe we should all start writing, congressmen, Presidents, City Councilmen, the whole schmere and tell them to get on the stick.

Very soon, I will be sending a letter to my local Republican Party stating that if I don't hear "national security" and "energy" linked in a significant way I will be sitting home on election day or voting for Hilary! I think it's that important.

"What do you suggest the detroit auto makers do to increase the mileage on their trucks and SUV's to 40mpg? Hybrid? Diesel?"

The politicians just pandered to oil and car companies. If they did not do that and realize that in giving us cheap oil the mideast was basically making us "addicted" to it 20 years ago we WOULD be driving cars (and trucks) that got 40 mpg (or alt energy)

"I don't see any reason to NOT tap domestic resources for oil while new measures are planned and implemented for auto makers to prepare for."

I believe the "Strategic oil reserve" is so that if OPEC did decide to cut us off completely then we would have some time to get our sh-- together. If you get rid of the reserve (or use a lot of it) then we could be in trouble when the mid east makes its play.

"I'm all for oil rigs off the coast of NC! They make things interesting for navigation"

Until there is a problem and turns your launching ramp into slime.