Branson Day

DB declares today "Branson Day" because Richard Branson really stepped up in the battle against global warming.

Down under

Australian Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane on Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth:"

"There are three places I do not go for advice on climate change," fumed Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane, dismissing the film in which Gore singles out Australia as trailing the rest of the world on climate change.

"One of them is to unsuccessful candidates for the US presidency who cannot even convince their own people that they are right. The second place is the movie," he said, adding that the third was the Australian opposition.

Votes for Al Gore in 2000: 51,003,926
Population of Australia: 20,555,300

What a dumbass. Plus, attacking the messenger(s) and refusing to even see the film are such intellectually courageous positions to take, aren't they?

Vroom, vroom*

Want to buy DB a car?

Well, it was worth a shot. But if you would, this new electric car from Tesla Motors would be greatly appreciated.

Wow.

* And it's silent

Who Killed the Electric Car?

Last night, DB went to the movies again because "Who Killed the Electric Car?" opened in select cities. Eventually it will be playing all over.

Go see it.

If the film didn't end on a note of optimism, it might have incited a riot. There are that many well-documented outrages in it and the actual destruction of the electric cars evokes an emotional response not unlike the feeling you may have had as a child when Bambi discovered her dead mother or when Old Yeller met his sad fate.

Today, while visiting Crooks & Liars, DB watched John Stossell attack people concerned about global warming with a dastardly misinformation campaign that ended with this pile of crap:

Let me just say that this, at bottom, it's a hatred of capitalism, a hatred of industrial production. Yes, it's true, we produce more carbon dioxide. But we are also the cleanest country in the world. As we get wealthier, the air gets cleaner. We can afford to do the things that maybe someday, if the globe is getting warmer, we may have to make adjustments. It's our wealth that will allow us to save the world. If we let these socialists control our lives, we'll all be worse off.

DB would like to propose a funding drive and competition, like the X Prize, to create a vehicle specifically to send Stossel to another planet.

"Who Killed the Electric Car?" is a perfect response to Stossel's contemptible drivel. Aside from the fact that "someday, if the globe is getting warmer" is a complete denial of reality, the fact of the matter is that GM refused to sell perfectly good electric cars to people standing outside with nearly $2 million. Instead of allowing supply to meet demand, they refused to renew the leases on the vehicles, refused to sell them, confiscated them and destroyed them. Perfectly good vehicles already built with buyers lined up to buy them.

Not that GM was entirely against making a buck:

"I called lawyers and said, 'What would happen if I didn't turn the car in?' and 'Could we fight this?' I was advised I would be prosecuted for stealing the car! They did an inspection of the car and for every little scratch they charged me. Then they took the car away from me and promptly crushed it."

Engineers, inventors and the people tasked with developing the EV programs were the absolute embodiment of capitalism and "industrial production." They put their hearts and souls into developing a great product and the wealthiest and most powerful interests in America shut them down.

But Stossel says that unless you put all your faith in the geniuses running companies like GM to "save the world," you are supporting socialists who want to "control our lives."

Can there be too much governmental regulation? Certainly. But is all regulation just an attempt at socialism? Absolutely not. When you change phone companies, you can keep your phone number. Is that because the phone companies love us all so much that they wanted us to have more freedom? No, it's because the phone companies lost a long, hard-fought battle with the government. Does anybody who enjoys the freedom to keep their phone number also, therefore, believe that the government should take over all the phone companies and stifle innovation? Ridiculous.

Things happen in the world that affect businesses. Problems in the Middle East affect oil. Cold weather kills crops. These natural and world events do not happen by design. They are not intended to create a positive effect for America. But corporations and capitalists adjust to these things. If they couldn't, the system would fail. But any regulation designed to protect consumers or the environment... these are insurmountable challenges.

If it weren't for governmental mandate, cars wouldn't have seatbelts and airbags and they'd get 10 miles to the gallon. By Stossel's logic, anybody in favor of faucets is against plumbing and water.

Stossel is living in a fairy tale world if he truly believes that unregulated capitalism is going to solve our environmental challenges. GM fought tooth and nail against governmental mandates and, as a result, Toyota is kicking their asses. Enormous corporations are not infallible and they do not encourage competition. They wouldn't have fought so hard against California -- and they wouldn't have completely destroyed their electric vehicles -- if they had any interest in helping America kick its oil addiction.

GM bought controlling interest in a battery manufacturer because the technology they invented was superior to what GM had been using. To whom did GM sell that interest when they scrapped the program? Chevron-Texaco. It's like the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," with a huge warehouse of things never to be seen again.

That's what unregulated capitalism yields. A great, innovative and environmentally responsible product with a market ready to buy... dead forever. I guess thinking that sucks makes DB a socialist.

In fact, one reason for optimism at the end of "Who Killed the Electric Car?" is that individual entrepreneurs enabled GM to build an effective electric vehicle in the first place and the hope is that more independent innovation will be on the horizon.

But as long as the government is going to support futuristic and oil-company-approved technologies, at the expense of existing and already acceptable alternative technologies like the electric car, it is hard to see how we're ever going to kick the addiction to oil.

Please go see "Who Killed the Electric Car?" when it comes to your town.

An inconvenient media

With so many bloggers in exciting Las Vegas this weekend, DB was feeling a little bit down about having to stay home. What to do for fun? How about a movie about the destruction of the entire planet? That should be good for some smiles.

So, this blogger decided to go see Al Gore's "An Incovenient Truth" with fellow blogger Arianna Huffington.

OK, DB didn't technically go with Ariana Huffington, but she was seated just a few seats away. Unfortunately, when the lights came on at the end, Arianna was gone, depriving yours truly of an opportunity to caustically ask "So do you still give a shit how many buttons are on Gore's suit?"

DB's companion left the movie "sad, but inspired to act." DB left angry. Maybe that anger will turn into something more productive. But for now, it's just anger.

While the airwaves are filled with debates about Ann Coulter's near-pathological lack of empathy and tact, people like Chris Matthews continue to discuss Al Gore in the context of "Why did he grow a beard after the 2000 election?"

The public deserves a real dialog about things that matter. Hopefully, the energy in Las Vegas this weekend will be an extra push for the efforts of those of us who are online, trying to overthrow the stranglehold our media corporations have on the national debate. To her credit, Arianna Huffington seems to be on the right side of history at this point. DB is optimistic about our chances.