there is really nothing more satisfying to me then ranting about something for a week only to have the new yorker arrive -- a week late, as usual -- featuring an article about said rant. it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside; we, the new yorker authors and editors and i, share a common thorn in our sides, the same things make us want to bitch and whine and write.
i jest, i jest.
yet i must contend...last week the glorious democratic victory of the midterm elections was slightly bitterwsweet -- my friends can contest that i was more than slightly annoyed by the lack of voter concern for the environment. thank you my fellow americans for voting correctly. clearly you care about the war in iraq, the economy, corruption in our government and the high price of health care -- all quite valid and worrisome issues, all worthy of a shift in power and the sooner the better!
but friends, voters, countrymen: can we ignore climate change for much longer? are we so blind, deaf and dumb? shouldn't this be but one of several issues impacting our votes? to me this is tragic shortsightedness, blissful self-delusion.
not only are we irreversibly destroying our earth, on a more local level we are hastening our own demise by fighting a costly unwinnable war against an enemy who we are funding through our gluttonous consumption of oil. anybody who isn't convinced by these two facts, who still thinks the environment isn't a relavant issue is clearly smoking the crack and needs a reeducation. i recommend thomas friedman and npr.
the new yorker spoke to this gaffe in a comment in the nov. 13 issue (now unavailable on the internet) stating that our current inaction will cost us 5-20% of world GDP, calling it the "greatest market failure the world has seen." clearly al gore isn't cut out to be the champion of this global cause, where is the leader who will step up and change our minds?