We, as a country, have decided it's our right to have 90# women
driving SUVs the size of school buses.

And as long as that 90-pound woman doesn't insist on buying 92 octane gas at
$1.19 a gallon, there isn't a problem.

When the 90-pound woman says, "Let's screw up the whole world drilling willy
nilly everywhere there might a few million barrells of oil to help preserve my
$1.19 premium," that's a problem.

200 years from now, when our great great grandkids are still alive, people will
find it quaint that we used petroleum for transportation- but they would still
be living with the effects of irresponsible drilling.

The Republicans are always hollering for free markets. Let the price of gas
seek its place in the market and we'll see a lot fewer SUV's. Yes, driving an
SUV, (or owning a boat), is a choice that we should be free to make----but we
shouldn't expect any guarantees about what the ultimate personal costs of that
decision could be.

I believe the actual cost of providing the energy should be passed along to the
final consumers of the energy. (that'd be you and me) Part of the cost of
energy as of now and probably into the foreseeable future will be a large US
military force in the middle East. We need to inspire the Arabs to continue
selling to us, and to discourage them from further consideration
of switching to the Euro as the standard currency of trade.

Unless you blow around under sail, it's pretty tough for a boater to get
cranked up about fuel efficiency. Even a super-efficient power boat won't do
much better than 3-4 nmpg.

From a resource efficiency standpoint, most boaters live in a glass house and
better not throw many rocks in the debate over oil supply and priorities of
use.