I realize the question seems odd, but in terms of energy policies, and the supplies of energy, race seems to be the key variable in determining those to whom the environmentalists give their “blessing” to drill for oil.
Think about it. With the exception of Canada and Russia, I can’t think of one oil exporting country that isn’t a so-called “third world” nation. And considering that Russia is an economic basket case (albeit one with a nuclear arsenal), I’d put them in the “third world” too. That covers all the Arab and Muslim nations, as well as Hugo Chavez in his comic opera country in South America as well as Mexico.
The environmentalists haven’t raised much fuss over Obama loaning two billion dollars to Petrobras in Brazil for them to explore for offshore oil, but they usually generate protest rallies at the mere hint that drilling might occur in ANWR. Of course the loan could really be either to help out the nearly poverty stricken George Soros, or as a payment for rent on the Brazilian Embassy in Honduras where ousted ex-President Zelaya is hiding out while fomenting a coup of his own against the constitutional government.
These same environmentalists who are horrified if a sea gull is killed by an oil spill, are seemingly oblivious to the plight of Nigerian oil field workers.
These same environmentalists are more than willing to effectively subsidize, via energy production, nation-states who casually mutilate young girls.
These same environmentalists give a pass to those who dominate their nations with terror and brutality and frustrate all attempts at true democracy.
These same environmentalists “sympathize” with regimes that use the trappings of theocracy to move toward regional nuclear domination.
These same environmentalists plead for more diplomacy in engaging those energy producing nations that use their vast resources as a weapon to alter the internal workings of other governments, if not subvert and dominate them altogether.
And all this happens simultaneously to protests over offshore drilling, the conversion of shale oil deposits to useful forms of petroleum and court challenges to frustrate America’s attempts to become self-sufficient in terms of energy.
But what the hell, most environmentalists are not, as the coy term implies, “people of color”. They do have an odd acceptance of allowing nations that are just chock-a-block full of people of color to rape their own people and lands and deplete their own resources.
Is that just so that their private jets can still take to the air to fly to yet another climate conference? Or is it so their limos can swiftly move them to the next “No Drilling” protest? If not a racist attitude, it, at best sounds like racial insensitivity.
So why are there no sounds of strangled outrage from the Black Congressional Caucus? Or the Progressive Caucus? Or the Congressional Hispanic Caucus? Does their silence when it comes to energy mean that they’re racists too?