Power-starved Californians can expect no help from Bush

So, California is in the midst of an energy crisis. My lights areoff when I leave the room, and I wrote this column with a pencil, onpaper. I’m doing my best to conserve power: I haven’t used myelectric razor for days,and I haven’t washed my clothes for weeks.

Some may say this is overzealous, but I say, nay! I will do mypart! I am a good citizen! I believe in the system, it will pull usthrough! This is America! I know that we can all rely on our fellowman.

In this country we help those in need. Heck, we’ve made a nationalcareer of coming to the aid of others. I have full faith andconfidence that our newly and duly-elected president, George W. Bushwill save us.

And if you believe all that, you probably voted for him.

In fact, President Bush (gosh, it hurts to call him that) has madeit his policy that California must deal with the energy problem byitself.

“They should expect no more help from the White House,” Busheconomic adviser Lawrence Lindsey said on CBS’s “Face the Nation”last Wednesday.

The republican platform of state’s rights supports this decisionquite nicely: with added rights come added responsibilities. So itseems that Bush is on solid ground when it comes to policy. Except,of course, for his ethos of, “Deal first with America’s problems,then the world’s.” He couldn’t talk enough about that one during thecampaign, and now he authorizes aid to India, which — last time Ichecked — isn’t in the U.S. My private theory is that Bush mistookIndia for Idaho.

Bush: “Yeah, India, that’s where they grow all those potatoes,right? I sure like french-fried potatoes, umm-hmm.”

Of course, my bleeding heart wants to aid India. I just don’t likeBush’s selective application of his campaign promises when theybenefit him, rather than when they benefit the nation.

I mean, let’s not kid ourselves. If this were happening in Texas,it would have been fixed months ago. Imagine Bush saying, “Texas’energy problem is due to a faulty deregulation scheme, and they needto deal with it on their own.” Next, he’ll be saying ‘subliminal’with five syllables.

Bush’s refusal to give us aid or declare a state of emergencywouldn’t have anything to do with our not having voted for him, wouldit? It wouldn’t be a little tag-back on his part. No, he wouldn’t dothat! No one would be so cavalier with the presidency. It wouldn’t berelated to his Texas oil-billionaire friends getting to sell 3 centpower to California at 40 cents. Nah, couldn’t be. He’s a smartenough man to deal with that kind of obvious pressure. No worries!

As a final postscript, I’ll step off my Bush soapbox. I’m furiousthat people in other states are signing petitions refusing to helpCalifornia with this crisis. Next time a hurricane devastates an EastCoast shoreline, or a tornado trashes a Midwest trailer park, I’llsay screw ’em.

-Charles Crawford is an information and decision systemsjunior. Send e-mail to daletter2000@hotmail.com.

-This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion ofThe Daily Aztec.