On The Editors At National Review Online

Ah yes!

Now we get it!

NRO's position on global warming/alternative energy must be unfashionable, yet informed.

Why? Because John McCain's position is exactly the opposite of theirs.

Of course, writing it on your editorial page don't make it so.

To put in another way: What do people think the true cost is, in treasure and blood, to continue hauling a dirty, finite resource out of hellholes around the globe? To have a foreign policy driven by our addiction to oil? To have a unholy dependence on nation states who would slit our throats if they could only figure out a way to take money from a dead body?

It's. A. Lot.

And we figure that any critique of any progressive energy plan better have those numbers in the "cost of doing nothing" column.

John McCain's energy plan is far from perfect. But it's a start. Which puts him ahead of 99% of DC Republicans (and their publishing organs) and ahead of 50% of the Republican Governors.

And he came up with his plan not because it's "fashionable" or "politically expedient". He came up with his plan because he knows what our energy reality is. And that reality has as much or more to do with our national and economic security as it does with polar bears and melting ice caps.

So the boys and girls at NRO might spend a little less time on "Any talk of ending our dependence on oil is an Al Gore plot to turn the keys of our kingdom over to Red China", and a little more time using their large soapbox to start a dialogue on what a fossil free future looks like and how to get there.

We're just saying.