Murky as Tar

Update: This TPM story clarifies the situation better than anything on the enviro tar sand sites.

I just signed a petition urging President Obama to deny permission for the tar sands oil pipeline from Canada.  I've followed the issue cursorily, but the "game over" statement by James Hansen opened my eyes to the full import of the decision.  He feels it will release such a quantity of carbon that the future will be lost.

The President is expected to make the yes or no decision before the end of the year.  But opponents have been demonstrating in front of the White House this week, some inviting arrest.  Bill McKibben was one.  He spent 2 days in a D.C. jail.  He had about 15 seconds to say why as a guest of Chris Hayes on Thursday's Last Word, and he used it well.

However, I can't say the same for the associated web pages on this issue, such as this one.   Now I admit that I am behind the curve on new informational techniques that younger folk use, particularly the reliance on Facebook, Twitter and texting.  But I still think I'm right about the ineffectiveness of this site, which is crammed with insider information and so many arguments that it looks like the usual environmental advocacy technique of throwing charges against the wall to see which ones stick with various constituencies.

Contrast that with the simple, clear message conveyed by the Exxon ads in favor of tar sand oil exploitation, which in that good ol American way, happened to run on MSNBC within seconds of McKibben's appearance.

There is no simple, clear, compelling argument that hits the eyes of anyone going to this site.  There is no sense of what is of greatest importance about this.  It's all a bunch of acronyms and political social networking, plus access to a bewildering ton of information.  It's a site for activists--but where is the site for those not yet converted?