Al Gore is an environmental zealot.
It is unfortunate for the environment that we are forced to choose between an environmental zealot and an environmental ignoramus. Admirers of moderation have little to cheer about in this election.
So really what you've been saying is, I only dislike certain lobby groups.
Lobby groups on both sides have a function: they force contentious issues onto the table, where politicians, who would prefer to avoid the contentious, are forced to discuss them and reveal their opinions. Ideally, though, no lobby group should be permitted to maneuver itself into a position where it has the power to actually decide policy on the issues with which it is concerned. That ideal has not been often met in our history, and it doesn't seem likely to come any closer to being met under either Bush or Gore.
Regarding China, about which we talked a bit a while back, it doesn't seem that the intimidating talk had much effect. Things will be interesting for a while. I was reading this article:
iht.com
and noticed, as I often have, that comments on the China issue from Asia-Pacific leaders are inevitably far more practical, moderate, intelligent, and grounded in reality than anything coming out of Washington. It would be wonderful if whoever prevails in the upcoming election would develop a China policy in conjunction with allies in the area. Like most wonderful things, though, it isn't likely to happen. |
