Not surprisingly, you missed my first point. Forget Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan. 99.9999% of the civilized world agrees that something should be done to combat disease and famine in those countries... the only issues are the "how" and the amount of money to spend.

Back to the point.... global warming. A doomsday prophecy for a hysterical some.... a meaningless, annoying gnat of an issue to be swatted for insensitive others.... and a real problem which requires further studies and solutions for the remaining logical population (my group ). So the environmental "alarmists" were "appeased" about how safe the Keystone Pipeline would be? Only to oppose it now because it would "allow for the consumption of fuel"? (Your words). Hmm... sounds fishy to me.

When did this "appeasement" happen? Were all concerns regarding spills in sensitive areas, potentially caused by seismic activity.... were all concerns regarding greenhouse emissions from the extraction of petroleum from tar sands..... were all those concerns officially laid to rest? What day did that happen? I mean... an event like that would've made headlines across the country: "Keystone Pipeline declared no longer a threat to the environment or global warming!" Details at 11.

And now these bad alarmists all of sudden are taking it all back... their approval, I mean... because the pipeline is going to provide oil for consumption. The bastards!!

And all of this happening against the ever present backdrop of the human race squeezing the living shit out of every reachable shale rock for every drop of oil that can be squeezed, while at the same time brushing aside any alternatives that might lower the multi-billion dollar profits made by the oil moguls by a couple of percentage points.

Did you use the phrase "idiotic and morally corrupt"?
Would you care to dust it off again?

And yeah..... Bush is long gone (thank God).
Jed Clampett with a college degree and a famous daddy.