July 26, 2008

The Top Ten Reasons Barack Obama Should Not Be President

..Are in fact all provided by quotes from the candidate himself.


1) - The system isn’t working…when communities are terrorized by ICE immigration raids, when nursing mothers are torn from their babies, when children come home from school to find their parents missing, WHEN PEOPLE ARE DETAINED WITHOUT ACCESS TO LEGAL COUNSEL…
” - Speech to National Council of La Raza

- By a combination of negligence and design the pathetically porous borders have managed to bless the people of the USA with anywhere from 12 to 20 millions illegal aliens. Obama is right that "the system isn't working". It is weak, ineffective and not effectively choking employment opportunities and benefits for illegals while failing to round them up and ship them out as quickly as they manage to arrive here.

As long as Mexico continues to dump its poverty and political dysfunctionality north of the border and America continues to coddle them once they arrive, there will be no solution to the massive and unprecedented illegal immigration crisis. What's good, though, is that Obama is twisting the arm of every American to learn Spanish, apparently so that we can communicate more readily with the millions upon millions of illegal aliens already in our midst.

2) - I could no more disown him than my own grandmother that once confessed to me she was afraid of black men she passed on the street.

- The infamous "throwing Grandma under the bus" quote delivered at a time when Obama was actually trying to defend hate speech peddler Rev. Jeremiah Wright. On multiple occasions Obama has made some disturbing comments in regards to race and he seems to struggle with his bi-racial heritage on a reoccurring basis.

3) - I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.

- Children are a punishment? Not a nice thing to say about one's possible future grandchildren. That is if one of his daughters makes a "mistake" but decided not to actually sacrifice it on the bloody altar of convenience. His grandchildren might someday find it very interesting what "Grandpa Obama" thought about them before they were even born.

It is in fact this very type of attitude towards little 'surprises' that leads to people resenting their children instead of loving and accepting them. Just because a child is unexpected shouldn't mean that it is antagonistically viewed as little more than a problem, inconvenience and undue burden that should automatically receive the death penalty for being 'a mistake' as defined by Obama.

4) - It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

- An elitist comment by an elitist delivered to a closed door group of elitists. Way to go Barack. I'd be mad but I'm a bit busy cleaning my gun and reading my Bible while angrily pushing one for English on the telephone. If I might take the liberty of quoting humorist and blogger Charlie Foxtrot:

"233 years ago, a group of bitter men clung to their guns and religion, driven by their antipathy towards people who weren't like them. In the end, I think it worked out OK."

5) - We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen.

-Obama apparently calling for ration cards, government monitoring of your thermostat and the outlawing of your vehicle all at the same time. A totalitarian, socialist, nanny state mindset is not usually the best virtue to be found in a possible President of the United States. Can anyone show me in the Constitution where the government can tell me how much I can eat? That quote is downright disturbing, and perhaps a bit more revealing than the Obama camp would like to admit.

6) - We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it's like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old - and that's the criterion by which I'll be selecting my judges.

-I guess asking for an impartial, objective judge who enforces the law and doesn't legislate from the bench would be too much to ask. What was I thinking?

You can always tell a conservative from a liberal. One begins a sentence with the words "I think that..." while the other begins a sentence with "I feel that..." It's not all about feelings and emotions; sometimes you've got to be able to think as well.

7) - Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

-More nonsense that barely makes any sense to anybody, But at least he'll bring "change", and that is what is more important than anything, isn't it? Not what kind of change, or the specifics of such change, or whether it is change for the better or for the worse. Does one dare mention the fact that change for the sake of change is intellectually adolescent at best?

8) - We should be more modest in our belief that we can impose democracy on a country through military force. In the past, it has been movements for freedom from within tyrannical regimes that have led to flourishing democracies; movements that continue today. This doesn't mean abandoning our values and ideals; wherever we can, it's in our interest to help foster democracy through the diplomatic and economic resources at our disposal. But even as we provide such help, we should be clear that the institutions of democracy - free markets, a free press, a strong civil society - cannot be built overnight, and they cannot be built at the end of a barrel of a gun. And so we must realize that the freedoms FDR once spoke of - especially freedom from want and freedom from fear - do not just come from deposing a tyrant and handing out ballots; they are only realized once the personal and material security of a people is ensured as well.

-Obama apparently slept through fifth grade history class. I wonder if he understands that both Japan and Germany (and a good number of other countries) had democracy imposed on them from the "barrel of a gun". I'm just asking. This quote also contradicts his repeated efforts to abandon Iraq to the various groups of thugs waiting in the wings who wouldn't mind making a play for power if the US abandons Iraq. So much for "free markets, a free press, [and] a strong civil society - cannot be built overnight". Picking up your ball and going home in a huff in the middle of the game won't accomplish those goals either.

In war you have to play to win, do whatever it takes to win, and accept no substitute for the destruction or neutralization of your enemy and the accomplishment of your goal. The Surge was two years later than it should have been, bitterly opposed by Obama and his cabal, and only McCain seems to have had it right all along. If you are going to fight, then you better fight to win. The enemy of Islamic jihadism, fundamentalism and radicalism has no such wavering, flip flopping, concern for the enemy and crisis of conscience. Neither should the heirs and protectors of Western Civilization.

Of the two major political candidates for president, one is willing to lose the war so that he can win the election. The other would rather win the war than win the election.

9) - Like no other illness, AIDS tests our ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes -- to empathize with the plight of our fellow man. While most would agree that the AIDS orphan or the transfusion victim or the wronged wife contracted the disease through no fault of their own, it has too often been easy for some to point to the unfaithful husband or the promiscuous youth or the gay man and say 'This is your fault. You have sinned.' I don't think that's a satisfactory response. My faith reminds me that we all are sinners.

- Apparently no one is to blame for the behaviors and practices that spreads such deadly, but entirely preventable, diseases (except for the conservative who fails to cheerlead and excuse it). And to not call sin, sin, is to deny the obvious, obscure the truth, excuse the inexcusable and in the end only contribute to the devastating plague that has killed millions instead of acknowledging the truth that could save the lives of millions more. We are all sinners, but wallowing in sin and not recognizing that actions have consequences can have serious, and deadly, results.

10) - I found the tears running down my cheeks.

- from Obama's book Dreams from My Father when describing the sermons Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

-It is one thing to rather callously hook up with a church for "street cred" to gain an entry into a certain voting bloc community (Wright was Obama's ticket into acceptance by Chicago's black community) but to subject one's own offspring and spouse to racist, paranoid, twisted and anti-American vitriol as well as to those who advocate such sickening philosophies for years on end is not only questionable, but downright disgusting and objectionable. If a Caucasian presidential candidate had done the same he'd be lucky to garner 15% of the vote, but Obama is given the usual pass solely based on his race and ideology. What a tragic commentary on the current state of politics and statesmanship in this country.

And to show my generosity, kindness and willingness to go the extra mile I'd like to also add a couple more "reasons" why Obama is pathetically unqualified to the be the next leader of the free world.

[03-14-08] - The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign...
[03-18-08] - Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

Will the real Barack please stand up? Which is it? You can't have it both ways. I demand answers and the truth. By the way, it would appear that Mr. Obama is woefully uninformed on what actually comes forth from the average pastor, priest or rabbi. If anyone has actually watched the various clips of the good Reverend at his best it is amazing that Barry could stand ten minutes of that, let alone twenty-three years worth. Obama has defended, funded, entertained and encouraged what is little more than a rotten river of sludge from the man that has been his pastor for the last two decades. Shame on him for supporting and legitimizing such drivel.

In the end, I believe that the American people do not need the government to be their savior, doctor, nanny, nutritionist, psychologist, and mother regulating and dictating every aspect of an individuals life. We are free citizens not serfs, subjects or slaves.

Democrats are increasingly experiencing buyer's remorse for anointing a puppet of the hard Left to be their presidential candidate. His inexperience, nanny state complex, and questionable views on a wide variety of issues should make all thinking and intelligent people take a long pause before voting for a person who is so stunningly unqualified, ill-suited and unready to be the next President of the United States.

Posted by David M. Huntwork at July 26, 2008 06:31 PM
Comments
Comment #257180

Huntwork,

Since you have recycled this post from another blog, I feel it necessary to recycle a response from the same thread.

With subtle changes of course.

I was prepared to vote for McCain in 2000 until the minions decided to throw him under his own bus.
That said, there is nothing remarkable here. This is just recycled bunk. If you truly had anything new to post I am quite sure that you would have done so already.

These talking points the right seems so fond of repeating aud nauseum may play well in the trailer parks where the inhabitants are so fearful they see a terrorist behind every bush (pun intended), but it makes me wonder if anyone beyond these folks really cares about anything you have posted here.

The emperor may have no clothes, but McCain has been hanging out in the nudist colony we call Washington DC far longer than Obama, and has been associated with folks that have truly screwed the American people for far longer as well.
It appears you guys on the right seem more interested in the notion that Obama might be a closet Muslim simply because his middle name is Hussein, than you are in making the changes necessary to turn this country around.

How lame is that?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 26, 2008 08:34 PM
Comment #257182

Not recycle, I write for a variety of sites and blogs. Watchblog usually gets the honor of first publication for a couple of days before it goes anyewhere else, but it just got up and running so this is the first opportunity for me to post here in quite some time. If you noticed, I was the first to post since watchblog reopened for business and since I am no longer a writer for ‘that other site’ I think watchblog deserves attention and a good article post as well.

And I won’t dignify your misdirection and stereotype ridden response with one of my own.

How lame is that?

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at July 26, 2008 11:22 PM
Comment #257184

And if you think I am the slightest bit sarcastic, think again. In the London Times, Gerard Baker writes a satirical report of Obama’s European tour, mocking the Obama press coverage.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece

And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at July 27, 2008 02:14 AM
Comment #257187

Like Rocky I have taken the liberty of doing a copy and paste from that other site.

David M

In the end, I believe that the American people do not need the government to be their savior, doctor, nanny, nutritionist, psychologist, and mother regulating and dictating every aspect of an individuals life. We are free citizens not serfs, subjects or slaves

If you really believe that anyone is advocating the above then you should probably be examining the extent of your gullibility and or willingness to accept and spread manufactured, inflammatory and false accusation.

His inexperience, nanny state complex, and questionable views on a wide variety of issues should make all thinking and intelligent people take a long pause before voting for a person who is so stunningly unqualified, ill- suited and unready to be the next President of the United States

I have taken a pause and considered the options and I am unable to find another candidate who is any more qualified or credible than Obama. All I see is a whiny old man who has nothing clever, creative or new to offer. He has no solutions because he is part of the problem.

It also seems to me that we already have a republican president who has proved to be stunningly unqualified, ill suited and never was ready to be the POTUS. How has that worked out? Is McCain really any different? I see no indication that he is. He certainly is not, nor has he ever been the Maverick you folks claim he is. He changes positions more often that he changes his depends. He is a republican tried and true who has supported failed republican policy over 90% of the time. Is more of what has failed us really what is good for us?

As for the rest of your article. Well it is nothing new and you obviously are presenting it in the context you wish to use it in, not necessarily in the context it was originally intended. The latter is glaringly obvious to any intelligent, free thinking voter capable of thought

Posted by: RickIL at July 27, 2008 08:54 AM
Comment #257188

David M

“And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.”

I find it ridiculously absurd that the only things republicans can find to criticize about Obama’s trip is the enormous amount of press coverage and the fact that he appeared too presidential. McCain dared Obama to make the trip in hopes that he would falter. Well he made the trip and he did not falter. All that is left is for you folks to admonish his appearance and create an aura of pseudo arrogance around him. If he had not made the trip you would have admonished him for appearing as unproven and uncaring in the world of foreign affairs. Your attempts to play the large crowds as a negative serves only to affirm the desperation your party is feeling. By your standards of swiftboating he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t.

The reality is that your man does not draw large crowds, or large press because he has nothing new to offer. He represents antiquated notions which are viewed as being regressive in nature and serving those who would sustain what is currently wrong in todays world.

Those of us who are not interested in the creation of false controversy think Obama looked pretty damned presidential. An image that has not been present in this country for eight years now. I would have been disappointed had he appeared as just another tourist.

It is good to see that the repbublican spin machine is alive and well. It has taken on a negative persona which no longer resonates well with the voting populace. In the end it may very well be the straw that breaks the camels back. A sad situation as it really seems to be the only campaign tactic your party has left.

Posted by: RickIL at July 27, 2008 09:34 AM
Comment #257190

“Obama is right that “the system isn’t working”.

by David M. Huntwork

You had it right in the first paragraph.

Posted by: Cube at July 27, 2008 09:56 AM
Comment #257193

So let’s go down your 10 points and clear away all the chaff so we can see what you are really espousing here.

1)

As long as Mexico continues to dump its poverty and political dysfunctionality north of the border…
Got any Irish in you, David? If so, then you might find it ironic that you are using the same drek that has been kicking around since the 1850s and INNA. In your eyes, the HIspanics who come here illegally are always miscreants and lowlifes and troublemakers, never people who, just like all of our ancestors, are just trying to make a better life for themselves and their families. These are the “poor, (the) downtrodden, (the) huddled masses yearning to be free” that America herself has always accepted but that the American people have often rejected out of fear of those who are different. You may want to ask yourself exactly what you fear about all these nasty unwashed illegals, and whether they are even half the threat you believe them to be.

2) Are Obama’s struggles with his “dual heritage” a bad thing? I find his attempts to see both sides of the racism issue (which is still an issue in this country, sorry) refreshing and heartening. How is this an issue?

3)The “punishment” is not the baby, so can the pro-life breast-beating. It’s the loss of opportunities and the potential hardships that an unwed, teen mother faces that are the real punishment, both for her and for the kid. When the Right starts giving a crap about programs that can help unwed mothers instead of slashing them left and right, then they can pass judgement on those who get abortions. Until then, get off that high horse.

4) Was this an unwise statement from Obama? Yes. Was it without truth? I don’t think so. Conservatism is where people tend to turn in times of hardship, when they feel oppressed by outside forces, things outside their control. The insular nature of racism, the feeling of power that weapons provide, the community of religion, these are reassurances in unsure times. Does this make me elitist? I don’t think so. It just makes me, and Obama, a little too good at psychology. People don’t like being transparent, makes ‘em edgy.

5) What a load of crap. Liberals don’t want a nanny state, we just want a little self-honesty. America wastes more energy, creates more garbage, and contributes to global warming more than anyone else, per capita and overall. This is not blame, this is fact, and if we really want to “lead the world”, then we need to do so in ways that take the world and future generations into account. Obama doesn’t want to outlaw SUVs, but he does want to encourage the Big 3 to create more efficient vehicles. As does your guy McCain, if memory serves. Ooh, does that mean that he wants a nanny state too?!?!?

6) If it weren’t judges jobs to interpret laws, you’d be correct that logic is all that is necessary. But interpretation is more than just logic, it requires a sense of justice. Justice is an emotional thought process. Right and wrong are ideas, not logical structures, and to remove empathy from the judicial system would be a tragedy and a huge mistake. What it comes down to is you don’t like Obama’s emotional responses. If it’s an emotional reaction to, say, abortion, that’s ok, right? Or towards the death penalty? If you think the conservative point of view is all logic and no emotion, you are fooling yourself. Or trying to fool others?

7) An economic tailspin, an unnecessary war, a rollback of rights that have existed since the dawn of this country… I’d say any kind of change from this course is a good change. Also, the entire point of Obama’s statement is not “change is good” but “if you want change, you need to make it”. It is, after all, an attempt to get people to come out an vote.

8) I’ll say this slowly, so that maybe you and the rest of the Republican party might hear it this time. Nobody ….wants …. us…. in… .Iraq. al Maliki doesn’t want us there. The Iraqi people don’t want us there. The AMERICAN PEOPLE don’t want us there. The Iraqi government will never have legitimacy until we leave. The insurgents will no longer have a target if we leave. There is no logical reason for us to stay. So why stay, except out of pride? That is unless somebody is making money off of this debacle….

9) This is religion, not politics, and doesn’t belong here.

10) So Rev. Wright never had anything uplifting to say? Every word out of his mouth for his entire career was nothing but vitriol and venom? I find that very very difficult to believe. Is the guy a bit of a jerk? Oh yeah. But I doubt that his every sermon was always I Hate Whitey. If it were, he would be the leader of a cult, not of a well-attended church.

One more word on this controversy. Here’s how I look at it. Rev Wright was always a bit harsh, but not as much as lately. Obama saw these things and disagreed, but found much he agreed with at the church, so stayed. When it became clear that Obama had a shot at the nomination, Wright cranked up the bombast to support him as best he could in his community. This backfired, thus Obama’s two statements. Wright was controversial always (statement 2), but the problems started while Obama was on the campaign trail, and in fact were because he was on the trail (statement 1). I see no contradiction.

So here’s what it comes down to, David. You either have created Obama as a boogeyman in your own mind or are attempting to do so in others, or both. You choose to see his statements through the lens of your own beliefs, and thus see a potential devil. On the other hand, I look around and see a country going completely the wrong direction. Agree or disagree with me, you cannot like where America is right now. I look at McCain’s voting record and his positions, and he is more of what we’ve had for the last 8 years. 8 years ago, America was an economic juggernaut, gas was $1.29 a gallon, and all was right with the world. After 8 years of a Democratic president, BTW. I’d like to go back to that, not have another 4 years of where we are going now.

L

Posted by: leatherankh at July 27, 2008 10:52 AM
Comment #257199

Response to the ten points:

1) “12 to 20 millions illegal aliens”, Round em up, move em on, rawhide! Should Bush start this policy now, or wait until the next guy to blame him for 9 trillion in debt, endless war, and filling the country with guys that want to trim our bushes, the bastards. How come no blame for McDs, BK, KFC, Wendys, Subway, etc? Innocent bystanders?

2) “bi-racial heritage” , his psychological problems have more to do with having no contact with his father, rather than his father’s race. This reveals more about you than BHO.

3) “burden, mistake”’ yes, children are a punishment, since they are no longer property to be sold or rented, but at least we can stop women from being free to control their own bodies.

4)” clung to their guns and religion” What religion was that, the Freemasons? The king was the legal head of their religion, as head of their tribe, from time immemorial.. And who were the “people who weren’t like them”, the native americans? The revolution also had something to do with a consumption tax on tea. Also they would be pretty shocked that we have a majority Roman Catholic SCOTUS.

5) “government monitoring of your thermostat and the outlawing of your vehicle” or setting up straw men to knock down. The next POTUS isn’t going to be an oil man, get used to it.

6) “objective judge” you mean like legislating that torture is okay, and corporations have the same rights as a person, but that people can’t sue them, unlike a municipality, so they’re really free cities of the empire. IMPEACH SCALIA NOW

7) on change “People can change anything they want to, and that means everything in the world. People are running about, following their little tracks, I am one of them, but we’ve all got to stop, just following our own little mouse trail. People can do anything. This is something that I’m beginning to learn. people are out there doing bad things to eachother. it’s because they’re being dehumanized. it’s time to take the humanity back into the center of the ring and follow that for a time. Greed, it ain’t going anywhere. They should have that in a big billboard across Times Square. “Without people, you’re nothing” That’s my spiel.” Joe Strummer, The Future is Unwrittten

8) so we’re going to stay in Iraq forever? To destroy our enemy, which is who, exactly, and what exactly is winning going to look like, other than permanent occupation? “Western civilization”, you mean like crusading in the middle east. Good luck with that, but I don’t want any part of it.

9) People that cough in public should be shot, disease spreading bastards. “Wallowing in sin”??? Seriously, where do you people come up with this stuff?

10) I’m all american, let’s put 5 million americans in jail, no wait, we already did that. Let’s keep them there forever and put 5 million of their children away, while waving the flag in their faces.

plus

The government already is our doctor and nutritionist, they think corn syrup is great because it works out best for ADM and the others who pay them to run the government for their interests. Also, we’re not “in the end”, rapture freaks to the contrary. since when do “doctors, nannnies, nutritionists” have “serfs subjects or slaves”?

and

“stunningly unqualified”, just like Reagan and Bush or now McCain and Babar, but BHO hasn’t actually been annointed yet, except by the media and the netroots bastards.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 27, 2008 02:54 PM
Comment #257202

Huntwork,

After reading some of your articles in the other places you post, and reading the links you have provided, it seems that you aren’t really interested in anything positive Obama might bring to the table.
To the contrary, like other far right pundits, you seem only interested in the negative things (true or not), that might be exploited to scare the beejesus out of folks that might not know any better.
You talk about qualifications. What exactly are McCain’s qualifications to be President?
That he has a military background?
That he has spent years as a Washington insider?

Unlike you I don’t see spending years in Washington a plus, and as I have said before this McCain isn’t the same McCain I would have voted for in 2000.
Obama sounds and looks Presidential, and while these aren’t qualifications for the Presidency, neither is being the bitter old fart it seems McCain has become.

After the debacle that has been the Bush Iraqi policy, frankly I think the Republicans need to get their house in order, and I don’t see where McCain is the guy to do it.
Obama at least seems interested to put the us vs them attitude that has divided this country for the last few years behind us. Again, I don’t see that from McCain.

I want is what’s best for the country.
From what I have read, you seem to want what’s best for conservatives.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 27, 2008 04:25 PM
Comment #257217

About point #6…

You can always tell a conservative from a liberal. One begins a sentence with the words “I think that…” while the other begins a sentence with “I feel that…” It’s not all about feelings and emotions; sometimes you’ve got to be able to think as well.

Bush, describing (then) Russian President Putin after their first meeting in June 2001:

I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul…

Uummm… able to get a sense of his soul? Would that fall into the ‘I think’ or the ‘I feel’ camp? Suddenly Bush is a liberal? Well… the way he spends my tax dollars like a drunken sailor in a house-of-ill-repute, I guess he could be considered such… but I digress.

Everybody both thinks and feels… The argument that one is inherently liberal or conservative is horse crap. There are plenty of conservative ‘feelings’ I question quite often.

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at July 28, 2008 12:47 AM
Comment #257230

Putting the content of the article aside, I notice that the cookie cutter liberal response is always “change”.

I agree the government as it is, is not working to the benefit of its citizenry.

But are any of you Obama supporters aware that Obama’s entire socialist platform is geared towards making the very thing he himself says is broken, bigger?

Posted by: Buffoon at July 28, 2008 08:18 AM
Comment #257252

Buffoon

But are any of you Obama supporters aware that Obama’s entire socialist platform is geared towards making the very thing he himself says is broken, bigger

Bigger is not the same as broken. Just because something is broken does not mean that size is the culprit. Government is not broken because of its size, but rather because it no longer functions in the capacity it was intended. Our parties spend more time refuting and obstructing each other out of hateful spite than they do actually effecting worthwhile legislation. This is not the result of size. It is the result of greed, corruption, power, wealthy elitist influence and a deep desire to retain it. Obama hopes to return the government back to the people by taking it out of the hands of those who would unscrupulously use it for their own selfish gains by steering it back to productive functionality.

Posted by: RickIL at July 28, 2008 05:38 PM
Comment #257253

Buffoon, Republicans grew the size of this government like they were FDR. Obama may increase its size a bit, but, Obama will do something Republicans refused to. He will HALT the national debt growth before he leaves office.

Have you noticed the Dem’s push to get a veto proof Senate in November? Dems are afraid of Obama when it comes to fiscal policy - he isn’t going to let them have there way with the taxpayers like they want. That is why they desperately need a veto-proof Senate even though one of their own will be president.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 28, 2008 05:41 PM
Comment #257255

David H,
In conclusion, you write: “Democrats are increasingly experiencing buyer’s remorse…”

That makes no sense. It does not correspond to anything in reality. Can you show even the slightest iota of evidence to back such a silly claim? The number of Democrats who support Obama is virtually identical to the number of Republicans who support McCain, and the number of Democrats who supported Kerry in 2004. This is actually rather remarkable, since Obama fought a difficult primary against a solid, capable, and well-funded opponent in the person of HRC.

In fact, most polls show Obama with a solid lead. There are polls showing as a lead of as little as 3%, and others showing as much as a 12% lead. The fact is, Obama is a tremendous politician with a terrific organization. Regardless of what you think of his policies, Obama’s skills and organizational abilities have been demonstrated, and deserve respect.

Sadly, the McCain is proving to be a terrible candidate, and his organization is just lame. Hardly a day goes by without McCain committing another gaffe. Inexplicably, his campaign seems to be focused upon the surge, and both he and the GOP seem to be completely focused upon drilling for oil anywhere and everywhere. This is shaping up to be a political debacle the likes of which we have not seen in our lifetimes.

David R,
I don’t think anyone believes Democratic legislators want to be veto proof in order to fight Obama. Just the opposite. Putting together a supermajority will enable the Democrats to pass legislation without fear of filibuster, and enact Obama’s initiatives. It’s all about cooperation between Democrats (as well as moderate Republicans). Currently the right wing GOP has frozen legislation with filibusters and holds, so supermajorities in the House and Senate are crucial for both Obama and the legislators.

Posted by: phx8 at July 28, 2008 06:29 PM
Comment #257257

Currently the right wing GOP has frozen legislation with filibusters and holds, so super-majorities in the House and Senate are crucial for both Obama and the legislators
That is what I have never understood, why the democrats let the republicans do a filibuster without making them get up and flap their lips.
What this allowed the right to do is claim congress did little with out owning up to any of the blame.Poor tactics to me.
— Savage

Posted by: A Savage at July 28, 2008 07:20 PM
Comment #257258

A Savage,
I think it’s a matter of professional courtesy. In the Senate, just one Senator can stop a lot of kinds of legislation. It really doesn’t pay for Senators to stick it to one another. As a result, there are a lot of compromises.

The current situation is exceptional. The take-no-prisoners approach of the GOP’s right wing has been a disaster, and a lot of Republicans will continue supporting Bush and Cheney, and choose to destroy their party and go down with the ship, rather than change.

It’s pretty amazing, really. Rather than admit Iraq was a mistake, they will insist otherwise. Global Warming? The same. On issue after issue, they refuse to adapt as circumstances change, to the point where conservatism is fossilized.

Their response to changes is consistently the same: attack the messenger, and engage in character smears.

Well, it’s a political party and a philosophy that won’t be missed.

Posted by: phx8 at July 28, 2008 07:40 PM
Comment #257262

phx8, sorry, but your are failing to acknowledge the blue dogs, in the Dem. Party, who will join with Repubs to halt the children in the candy store of tax payer’s pockets.

Yes, Dem’s do fear Obama’s potential for vetoing spending. Congress people truly believe that getting reelected by bringing home the pork is vastly more important than fiscal responsibility and long term economic viability.

Congress people of BOTH parties have demonstrated this for decades and as recently every spending bill passed this year.

Sorry, phx8, but, you are just plain wrong on this. The insiders know where their priorities are, and their priorities aren’t Obama’s, who also has his eye on reelection in 2012, which can’t happen without fiscal discipline. He knows it. The Blue Dogs know it. And the Republicans daggum sure know it.

Posted by: David R. Remer at July 28, 2008 11:27 PM
Comment #257271

I’m with Rocky. This article is a heavy load of Rightwing Talking Points and Overall Bunkum.

Just for balance, here is my own personal top ten list of why America Should Not Allow McCain To Become President.

1. Too Damn Old, Unhealthy, and Confused.
He’s 71, just had another malignant melanoma scraped off his face, and has been steadily making embarrassing gaffe, after embarrassing gaffe.

2. Clueless. The economy is tanking (thanks to eight years of Republican “free market”, voodoo economics, and rampant ‘n’ reckless deregulation), and McCain has demonstrated that he knows nothing about the economy. In fact, he couldn’t even manage and run the economy of his own presidential campaign! Let him manage and run the economy of the entire nation when we’re already headed into a deep recession? No freaking way.

3. Lobbyist-Controlled.
Despite all the blatantly dishonest rhetoric to the contrary that has been carefully packaged and sold to the American People for many, many years, McCain is as thick as thieves with Washington Lobbyists and Defense Contractors. Indeed, for fifteen years he has been the leader of the International Republican Institute.

4. Spineless. Shameless.
Not that we’ll ever hear about it in the MSM, but the glaring truth is, McCain Holds the National, All Time, Utterly Spineless and Shameless Flip-Flopping Record. Will O’ the Wisp McCain obviously doesn’t even know what he thinks at this point. (See Reason #1 above - this could well be related.)

5. Warmonger. Obvious Nutcase.
“Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”
Said while wearing that Jack O’ Lantern smile of his — like it’s all a bloody joke.

“I’m sorry to tell you, there’s going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars.”

Personally, I don’t believe for a moment he’ll be at all “sorry” to tell us about these “other wars” he’s obviously anticipating. Indeed, all of his defense profiteering buddies over at the International Republican Institute will no doubt cheer him loudly.

Reporter’s Question: “President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years —” (instantaneously cut off by McSame)
McSame’s Glib Answer: “Make it a hundred.”

NO, let’s not. Let’s finally end this endless Mistaken War and Occupation that’s cost this country (and Iraq) so many lost lives and so much spilled blood. So many billions of dollars of debt each and every month. So much pain and a lot more debt to be payed out for years and years to come - as this nation attempts to help put the lives and the health of our soldiers back together as best as we possibly can.

6. Unstable. Volatile Temper. Overly Defensive and Snotty as Hell.
I think we’ve had quite enough of immature leadership, don’t you?

7. Neocon John.
Has voted in accordance with Bush, the worst president in this nation’s history, on practically everything. Has based his whole campaign on the exact same policies as the Bush Administration.
I think we’ve all had quite enough of such disastrous and short-sighted policies, yes?

8. Dishonest. Not to mention Unoriginal.
Claimed he would run a clean, respectful campaign, but has now become just another lying, Rovian-Republican, slime-chucking, attack dog. (See reasons # 4, and 6, above.)

9. Millionaire-heiress Stepford Wife.
Former synthetic-heroin abuser who stole her drugs from her own charity, and should have gone to jail, but didn’t due to her political connections. Cheated with McCain while he was still married to wife #1, before she became wife #2. Super passive and rather unintelligent public persona on display. Really doesn’t seem to have any opinions, or too much to say about anything at all. Bankrolled John’s entire political career, and yet McCain called her a c—t - right in front of several reporters. (See reason #6 above.) Lots of really obvious plastic surgery also on display here. Dresses too young and Barbie-dollish for her age.
Thus, she’s a truly terrible role model for American women. No, make that a terrible role model for all females, everywhere.

10. McCain is Inarticulate and obviously Not Very Intelligent.
I think America has also had enough of such incoherent, dangerous and incompetent leadership.

Well, there’s my list. Lefties and Indies should feel free to add to it, if they wish to.

PS. nice to see WB back online again.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at July 29, 2008 11:07 AM
Comment #257285

New campaign song for BHO, variation on “I’m an indian too”, from Annie Get Your Gun

Like Ted Kennedy, Hillary, Inouye
Like those Senators
I’m a Senator too, a noo-oo-oob, a noob

Just like Rockefeller, Stabenow, Mikulski
Like those Senators
I’m an Senator too
A Noo-oo-oob, a noob

Soon, on convention day, without a care
I may run away, as the Democratic candidate

And I’ll have a running mate, and maybe debates, Which will go to prove
I’m an Candidate too
A noo-oo-oob
A noob.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 29, 2008 06:07 PM
Comment #257296

“Let him manage and run the economy of the entire nation when we’re already headed into a deep recession?”

VV,

Let me clue you and all the other liberals in on something. MANAGING AND RUNNING THE ECONOMY IS NOT THE PRESIDENT’S JOB!!! As much as you wish it were different, the United States is still not a totalitarian communist nation. Get over it.

Posted by: Duane-o at July 29, 2008 11:32 PM
Comment #257297

David Huntwork,

I need to write my own article. I should not be wasting my time responding to yours - but you hooked me - good job - bad article.

In your first point, you wrote:

As long as Mexico continues to dump its poverty and political dysfunctionality north of the border and America continues to coddle them once they arrive, there will be no solution to the massive and unprecedented illegal immigration crisis.
Mexico is dumping “its poverty and political dysfunctionality north of the border”??? It wouldn’t have anything to do with NAFTA (that is the North American subsidised non-free trade agreeement), it wouldn’t have anything to do with that shipping American jobs south, but even more corn south putting Americans with good paying jobs out of work while simultaneously creating poverty and a “good” in Mexico. No - the problem is Mexico’s “political dysfunctionality” not rampant proto fascist corporatism in America. Granted Mexico is dysfunctional. That is why they agreed to be plundered and raped by the American corporatists. Typical conservative, never look at the one side of the problem that you could actually change…

Your points 2 and 3… There is no there there. He was being rhetorical. You are twisting his meaning. For example in point 3, he is clearly suggesting that his children should have access to sex ed, birth control, and as a last resort abortion, but you twist his meaning for your own twisted purposes and make it all about abortion and him not loving his future grand children instead of recognizing that maybe he loves his grandchildren enough to want them to have a chance in life…

Your point 4. I thought that he was being nice to the right wing racist wacko nut jobs.

Your point 5. I agree with you here. Suggesting that Americans should sacrifice in order to make the world a better place is unAmerican. That is what my parents thought during WWII when they planted their victory garden. But you twist his call for true patriotic sacrifice into the government monitoring your thermostat - ya right.

He is right in 6, but his point is weak I think. We need to get rid of the activist conservative judges who are subverting our constitution for the profit and pleasure of their conservative proto-fascist corporatist friends…

Your point 7. Take a campaign slogan out of context and distort his call for the American people to accept patriotic responsibility for their own future - ya right.

Your point 8 is just ludicrous. I would need a whole article to answer that. Maybe that will be my article.

Your point 9 about aids shows the true (heartless) face of compassionate conservatism.

Your point 10 - please… Rev. Jeremiah Wright is an idiot and Obama appropriately disowned him, but you are taking a few of his comments out of context, especially out of the context of his life long ministry. Even most of the out of context comments are reasonable. You are so busy being outraged that blacks might have some resentment and distrust that you don’t have time to talk about the racist fanatical, hypocritical, fascist Christian extremist nut jobs that are driving McCain’s bus. The miraculous thing about Obama is that he does not have that resentment or distrust. “The holiest place on earth is where an ancient hatred has become a present love.” Obama epitomizes that.

Then you write:

Democrats are increasingly experiencing buyer’s remorse for anointing a puppet of the hard Left
That is great. I did not know Kucinich won? That is who I really wanted. Obama is a moderate. That is why independents like him. I think he is too moderate. That is why I want him to choose John Edwards - a true liberal.


Posted by: Ray Guest at July 29, 2008 11:35 PM
Comment #257299

Duane-o

“Let me clue you and all the other liberals in on something. MANAGING AND RUNNING THE ECONOMY IS NOT THE PRESIDENT’S JOB!!! As much as you wish it were different, the United States is still not a totalitarian communist nation. Get over it.”

Ever hear of the ship of state? The metaphor is used because it fits so very well.

The captain of the ship does NOT manage the Engine Room…but he IS responsible for everything that happens there, just as he’s responsible for everything else that happens on board.

So what does the captain DO to ensure the Engine Room runs properly? He ensures that the Supply Department gives them the parts and materiel they need. He ensures the crew is trained and able to respond to engineering emergencies. He makes sure Navigation does their job by not running aground and fouling the screws and the main condenser. And there is a host of other things he must do in order that engine room can keep going.

So how does this compare to the nation’s economy? Easy. The ship can do NOTHING without a functioning engine room. The nation can do NOTHING without a functioning economy.

Yes, Duane-o, the president does NOT ‘manage’ the economy…but he for doggone sure ensure the economy has the support AND regulatory tools it needs to run properly.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at July 30, 2008 12:40 AM
Comment #257300

Duane-o:

Let me clue you and all the other liberals in on something. MANAGING AND RUNNING THE ECONOMY IS NOT THE PRESIDENT’S JOB!!!

Yes, it is. Indeed management is an extremely important aspect of the president’s job, and for this reason, all of them are expected to carefully shape a set of economic policies and objectives. This is because they are our nations leader — the head manager/overseer in charge of a whole host of things, including ensuring that the American economy can and will continue to function and run.

As much as you wish it were different,

Oh, I think that the vast majority of Americans wish the state of our economy was totally different than the way it currently stands. In fact, I’m fairly certain that that majority is now very eager for a wise, intelligent president with an administration that will actually be capable of shaping good and effective policies all across the board. One that will manage and run things a great deal better than what we’ve seen over the last eight disastrous years.

the United States is still not a totalitarian communist nation. Get over it.

Yet another dollop of nonsensical rightwing crapola. Ah well, I suppose “the right” of righties “to be uninformed”, wrong, accusatory, and as insulting as possible must be wearily tolerated at all times.

Glenn,

Excellent reply to Duane-o, and bunch of very good metaphors, but I’m still going to stand on what I wrote. Because when you boil it all down, a big part of the president’s job really is to act in a head management capacity.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at July 30, 2008 02:27 AM
Comment #257302

Samir,

I’ve said before and I’ll say it again. Be very careful what you wish for because you just might get it.

Posted by: David M. Huntwork at July 30, 2008 03:30 AM
Comment #257305

There are some obamatrons who seem very sure of themselves here. Arrogance. Keep talking about old people and trailer trash! That is how you will lose this election because it blinds you to reality. Been spewing amongst yourselves for too long and now you have yourselves convienced that hate will win the day for an empty suit, radical Black racist candidate. Good luck with that!

You should have put Hillary in there if you wanted to stand a chance to beat McCain. The Democrat Party controlled Congress now stands at a 9% public approval rating. You better get off your high horses quick!

Posted by: Sara at July 30, 2008 07:53 AM
Comment #257306

1. Too Damn Old, Unhealthy, and Confused.
He’s 71, just had another malignant melanoma scraped off his face, and has been steadily making embarrassing gaffe, after embarrassing gaffe.

Let’s see now. There’s been no evidence so far, and no doctor stating that it is melanoma. So, you’re saying because you’re such a smart lie-beral, that you can tell from some magic Obama vibe that it’s melanoma? I’m a cancer survivor who was misdiagnosed later with a recurrance and I can tell you that when speculation runs wild about it, it is crushing. So, knock it off. That’s just plain cruel and stupid.

As far as gaffes, I’m trying to figure this out. He said that the surge was a key component and that the Iraqi’s had our assurances before it was announced that it was going to happen. And that’s a gaffe. But, I guess Obambi is going to pull troops from all 57 states in his 10th year as president for his new surge to Afghanistan? Obama makes a LOT of mistakes. He is a blithering idiot when you get him away from his teleprompter. In other words, do you want a president that can think, or one that’s pre-programmed?

2. Clueless. The economy is tanking (thanks to eight years of Republican “free market”, voodoo economics, and rampant ‘n’ reckless deregulation), and McCain has demonstrated that he knows nothing about the economy. In fact, he couldn’t even manage and run the economy of his own presidential campaign! Let him manage and run the economy of the entire nation when we’re already headed into a deep recession? No freaking way.

Wow. What a version of history you must have in fantasy land. The economy has some serious problems. What are the key ones? Housing bubble. O.K. What lead to that? Chris Dodd and his ilk changing the rules to allow their buddies who gave them fat-cat loans to make life easier. What else led to it? Hmmmmm… Could it be the political correctness that said “Well, if they can’t qualify minorities because the minorities can’t afford it, then it must be RACISM!!!” Political correctness strikes again.
Second major problem. Gas prices through the roof. I’ve seen the comment that gas prices were $1.49 when Bush took office. Yes. That’s true. But, when the Democrats took office, it was $2.19. No drilling, no nuclear plants, no refineries, no new coal or natural gas, and prices went through the roof. Get your dem buddies to get off their duffs and fix the problem and you will see prices go down. Amazing that when Bush lifted the ban on offshore drilling (which was basically symbolic because of the Congressional ban), prices dropped $16 per barrel in 3 days. And the dems solution….dip into our strategic reserve to get us an average savings of $.03 per gallon and tax the gas higher and tax the oil companies. It has NOTHING to do with “voodoo economics” and that statement about it being the fault of the “free market” shows you know NOTHING about economics. At all.

And I wonder what happens when Obama’s “Global Poverty Tax” hits and you and I and every American have to pay over $900 BILLION to the United Nations to cover taxes that he’s trying to get levied to allow them to fix “world poverty”.

3. Lobbyist-Controlled.
Despite all the blatantly dishonest rhetoric to the contrary that has been carefully packaged and sold to the American People for many, many years, McCain is as thick as thieves with Washington Lobbyists and Defense Contractors. Indeed, for fifteen years he has been the leader of the International Republican Institute.

And George Soros and Moveon.org and the NetRoots folks at DailyKos don’t represent Obama’s owners? You lose on this point.

4. Spineless. Shameless.
Not that we’ll ever hear about it in the MSM, but the glaring truth is, McCain Holds the National, All Time, Utterly Spineless and Shameless Flip-Flopping Record. Will O’ the Wisp McCain obviously doesn’t even know what he thinks at this point. (See Reason #1 above - this could well be related.)

PLEASE tell me you’re joking. McCain showed more spine than most will EVER show in a lifetime in just a 5 year stint. How in the WORLD can you call someone who refused to break in a POW camp spineless. That’s the height of arrogance and insults. And for the “flip-flop” award….. Wow. A presidential candidate who over the course of a year decides to alter his positions to the current needs of our country or a presidential candidate who changes his position 3 times in less than 6 hours to suit his audiences. Or did you forget about that? Obama has basically flipped on just about EVERY position he’s taken in the primaries.

5. Warmonger. Obvious Nutcase.
“Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”
Said while wearing that Jack O’ Lantern smile of his — like it’s all a bloody joke.

Ummmmm….. Perhaps because he has a sense of humor and likes to actually make jokes? Or do you not get that?

Reporter’s Question: “President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years —” (instantaneously cut off by McSame)
McSame’s Glib Answer: “Make it a hundred.”

NO, let’s not. Let’s finally end this endless Mistaken War and Occupation that’s cost this country (and Iraq) so many lost lives and so much spilled blood. So many billions of dollars of debt each and every month. So much pain and a lot more debt to be payed out for years and years to come - as this nation attempts to help put the lives and the health of our soldiers back together as best as we possibly can.

Wow. So, if you honestly believe that the Iraqis prefer wood chippers chopping their loved ones apart at the whims of Saddam and his sons, middle of the night disappearances and arbitrary rules, a country shut down for times because of Saddam’s blatent disregard for their “unconditional surrender”, and other failures of their society as opposed to a rule of law and justice, and you believe that we should never have responded to Bagdad’s attempts to shoot down planes in patrol zones, and the weapons of mass distruction (which, by the way, HAVE been found in Iraq in various places, at various times, including 550 TONS of Yellowcake (you know, that stuff the Dems lied and said Saddam wasn’t actually trying to buy)) then you go ahead and delude yourself. This was a necessary part of the war on Global Terrorism. Saddam was a state sponsor of terror, and Iran was too heavily guarded to easily be overthrown. Something had to be done in that quarter to take the war to the middle east, instead of having it on our shores. There were 27 reasons that we went to war outlined by the president. And you guys on the left convienently forgot 26 of them and lied about the 27th.

6. Unstable. Volatile Temper. Overly Defensive and Snotty as Hell.
I think we’ve had quite enough of immature leadership, don’t you?

Immature leadership? Like President Bush, who has been a gentleman and a statesman, or President Clinton (oh, whoops. He was getting some side action from at least one intern)? Obama has shown a propensity for anger. But, we don’t know. Rarely do you seem him without his handlers tightly controlling his every word.

7. Neocon John.
Has voted in accordance with Bush, the worst president in this nation’s history, on practically everything. Has based his whole campaign on the exact same policies as the Bush Administration.
I think we’ve all had quite enough of such disastrous and short-sighted policies, yes?

“…the worst president in this nation’s history, on practically everything.” You, sir are a revisionist, a liar and an idiot. There’s no doubt that Jimmy Carter was CONSIDERABLY worse than Bush has been on domestic AND foreign policy BY FAR! And Carter wasn’t even the worst.

8. Dishonest. Not to mention Unoriginal.
Claimed he would run a clean, respectful campaign, but has now become just another lying, Rovian-Republican, slime-chucking, attack dog. (See reasons # 4, and 6, above.)

???? Barak Obama is running the dirty campaign. Note your idiotic comment at the beginning stating that McCain has Melanoma again. There have been attempts to smear the Republicans with just about everything from racism to religious persecution. Name ONE Republican operative or McCain representative that has used Barak Obama’s race in a negative manner. Yet, if you ask pretty much anyone who’s just barely listening, who has smeared who, “It’s the Republicans calling Barak black and being mean about it.” How about Geraldine Ferrarro…..nope, she’s a Democrat. How about Jesse Jackson….nope, also a Democrat.

9. Millionaire-heiress Stepford Wife.
Not even going to repeat your drivel attacking Cindy McCain.

She took over her father’s business and in the course of a 10 year cycle, doubled the profits of the business.
She has selfishly worked (WITHOUT trying to draw attention to herself) on MANY projects to help the impoverished and downtrodden. She puts that shrieking she-devil of a wife that Obama has to shame. She’s proud of this country. No conditions asked. Unlike the “I’ve never been proud of my country until now” wife of the Demoncrat candidate.

10. McCain is Inarticulate and obviously Not Very Intelligent.
I think America has also had enough of such incoherent, dangerous and incompetent leadership.

Have you HEARD Barak Obama talk when he’s not on Teleprompter? He did an interview the other day that was a 45 minute interview, and during that, if you cut out the interviewer questions, he had 37 minutes. Of that, 8 mintues were “ummm” and “ah” and pauses and stops. He’s a blithering idiot off his cue cards. Why do you think he doesn’t want to debate McCain. McCain will wipe the floor with him.

Posted by: spacewarp at July 30, 2008 09:01 AM
Comment #257315

“She took over her father’s business and in the course of a 10 year cycle, doubled the profits of the business.”

Dude, she sells beer.

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 30, 2008 11:38 AM
Comment #257316

Spacewarp,
Obama is a blithering idiot? Really? You have the gall not just to say, but to put in writing and post for the world to see, that Obama is a blithering idiot?

Look, there’s nothing wrong with disagreeing over policies. But Obama is highly intelligent and very articulate. He was president of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude. Do you have any idea what that takes? He lectured on constitutional law. Obama is 46 years old, and just led a primary campaign that defeated Hillary Clinton in a stunning upset. Do you have any clue whatsoever what you’re up against?

Compare this to McCain. He is the son of an admiral who graduated from Annapolis 894th out of a class of 899. That was the end of his education resume. That’s it.

Thanks for the hilarious recap about the economy and free markets. Just out of curiousity, do you understand what happens when the dollar falls against other currencies? Just wondering.. . You know… Things like interest rates, deficits, debts, and commodity inflation?

In four years, the economy under Jimmy Carter created over 10 million jobs. In seven years, Bush policies have resulted in about 5 million, and jobs have been LOST every month this year. Quite a performance by Bush.

Too funny. Hey, how’s that stock market working out?

Posted by: phx8 at July 30, 2008 12:44 PM
Comment #257318

Yes, I’ll say it. He’s a blithering idiot without his teleprompter. He may have been bright once, but now, he’s so handled that he can’t keep a coherent thought through his head. And also, he’s so wrong on so many issues that I can honestly say I believe he’s an idiot.

And yes, I understand what happens when the dollar falls. Do you understand what happens when supply is strangled and we have to export dollars to other countries for resources we can produce domestically? I’d love to hear exactly which part of my “hilarious recap about the economy” is actually wrong. You cannot point to a single item in what I said that is actually incorrect.

The housing market is a bubble. It’s been escalating out of control. Mortgage lenders were forced to relax rules on qualifications because they were not getting enough minorities, so lending rules were relaxed at government urging and mandates. Also, there are a lot of pieces of the regulation of the banking industry that have been handled by Chris Dodd and several others who received sweetheart deals from Countrywide financial. That’s proven fact. Friends of Angelo program. Take a look for it. You might be surprised. If it were Republicans who did that, there would be hearings 24X7 from the libs.

Jimmy Carter’s policies led to MANY of the problems our country faces today. Unemployment averaging 6.6% through his tenure, inflation spiraling out of control.

And just because you obviously weren’t paying attention, June’s job numbers came out today. And there was an increase as opposed to the expected drop.

Inflation has been kept low, and despite the fact that the Dems are blowing a golden opportunity by kneeling at the altar of environmentalism (stress the “mental” part), to increase their base. Think about it. There are a potential 500,000 new jobs to be had if they were to start pursuing drilling today. Imagine what that would do to the tax base. Also, imagine what taxing all that oil and natural gas we retrieve would do for the tax base. And to top it all off, imagine what would happen if we weren’t shipping $700 billion a year off to countries that we aren’t all that friendly with. And imagine, if you will, what we could do with the extra revenue generated from having that $700 billion IN our own country. They could fund ALL KINDS of liberal programs.

Though, if they could just fix the Welfare system, we’d cut so much of our overhead it isn’t even funny. Simple question for you phx8. Of every dollar we send to Washington that goes to welfare (and the medical side of welfare isn’t included in this calculation), what percentage of it goes directly to the recepients of the programs designed to help them?

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 30, 2008 04:31 PM
Comment #257327

Spacewarp,
You write: “And just because you obviously weren’t paying attention, June’s job numbers came out today. And there was an increase as opposed to the expected drop.”

That was the ADP private payroll report. The number most people use is non-farm payroll, which comes out the first Friday of the month. Please do not confuse the two in a discussion of unemployment numbers. It’s confusing enough with the normal volatility and revisions of the number everyone uses, without introducing another number no one uses much.

You really shouldn’t use snark like “And just because you obviously weren’t paying attention” because it makes you look bad. Don’t do that to yourself. Know what your talking about. If you’re sure, then dish it out.

By the way, do you believe the report? Do you seriously believe the financial sector added 4,000 jobs?

Take this statement which you make: “Do you understand what happens when supply is strangled and we have to export dollars to other countries for resources we can produce domestically?” Oil production peaked in the US a long time ago. Not even drilling ANWR can change that. Research the Hubbard Curve. It applies to all commodities, but it’s particularly useful in a discussion of oil.

What most people do not understand is that it is not possible to drill our way out of an oil shortage, because the supply is being depleted faster than it can be replaced. That is the underlying driver behind the rise in oil prices. It’s not specualation. It’s not a matter of restrictive regulations. Cantarell, the major oil field in the Gulf of Mexico and one of the largest fields in the world, is nearly exhausted. Ghawar, the big one in Saudi Arabia, is passing its peak.

These fields are huge, and they cannot be replaced. Offshore drilling in the US and drilling ANWR are stopgap measures at the very best, and they come at a high cost, because they risk damaging areas which are highly valued.

Posted by: phx8 at July 30, 2008 05:45 PM
Comment #257332

To finish the thought…

Would additional drilling add 500,000 jobs? That seems doubtful. The problem with additional drilling is that it has to occur further and further at the margins of what is practicable, and those margins mean the drilling becomes more and more expensive. It assumes permanently high oil prices, and no one believes additional drilling will relieve US reliance on imported oil.

Rather than drilling, there are two obvious paths. First is conservation. That is already happening, and it has the greatest and most immediate impact, but it can happen a much greater degree. The second is developing alternative energies and alternative means of transportation.

And that is a big reason why Bush is the worst. president. ever. He and Cheney see the world through the lenses of oil tinted glasses. For them, it is always a matter of fossil fuels, and always will be. Bush and Cheney have proven to be unique in US history, for bringing an utterly inappropriate focus and a fossilized conservatism to the plate, at precisly the time the US needed the become adaptable, and change.

Posted by: phx8 at July 30, 2008 06:22 PM
Comment #257334

“president of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude. Do you have any idea what that takes? He lectured on constitutional law. Obama is 46 years old”

I’m watching the 22nd Ep of Real Time with Bill Maher, just after the 2004 IA caucuses, where he talks about Edwards being too young at 50, and they all joke about H Dean’s supporters having nose rings and telling older people how to vote. The standard for BHO seems to be, everything is cool. On the Harvard/Law Review/smart guy nexus, BHO has to be lying about his drug use or it’s simply another example of how it has helped him to be legally black. I don’t get why BHO’s umming and aahing doesn’t get the same treatment as Dean’s hollering, or Bush’s inarticulate ramblings.

phx8, I think you meant the Hubbert Peak, rather than the Hubbard Curve.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 30, 2008 06:49 PM
Comment #257337

You’re right, I stand corrected. The Hubbert Curve is a classic bell curve which is the cornerstone of the Hubbert Peak theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak_theory

As far as energy policy goes, Obama’s policies are known, and the Bush administration’s policies are a matter of woeful history. I’m not even sure what McCain thinks.

While he was in Oregon, McCain made headlines by being green. Now McCain favors drilling anything and everything, even as he supposedly believes Global Warming is a great problem.

Posted by: phx8 at July 30, 2008 07:15 PM
Comment #257339

phx8, to me BHO is like Britney Spears to GWBush’s Jessica Simpson. The talented people put him out there as a front man to sing their songs. I would rather have the real thing, not the manufactured publicized entity. Andrea Mitchell had a pretty interesting comment on his recent tour, saying that she wasn’t really reporting on what happened, since the press was actually kept away from the photo opportunities provided to him by our military.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 30, 2008 07:33 PM
Comment #257342

This has been interesting reading. It is interesting that so many here stick to their webpersona names so that there is continuity. What amazes me is that there are Republican and conservative supporters who can look at the economy, the list of presidential powers seized (it’s OK if it’s THEIR guy), the state of our foreign policy and lack thereof and still own up to being supporters. Thanks for identifying yourselves so that we can identify those who are completely unaware of what is happening around them.

BTW, it wouldn’t bother me much if McCain does win. I think the country is not quite ready to change this ridiculous us vs. them governance that we’ve been in. The corporations are running the show and laughing at us all the way to the bank. Frankly, I think that between the racists and the group of conservatives like my family - who know NOTHING about any facts when you start getting into CAUSES and REASONS for their positions, that McCain has a good chance. Funny thing is, that on vacation this summer, my father, mother, brother, and 3 of my four sisters admitted that they would not vote Republican. But the ‘treasonous liberal’ and ‘liberals are socialists’ attitude that has been ingrained by the Hannitys and Limbaughs of the media has taken root too deeply for them to actually vote for Obama.

Oh well. I don’t owe anyone any money including my house. I’m 52 and have my retirement basically done so I just have to manage my investments and cruise till retirement so I’ll survive whatever - I think. I’ve already told my kids (24, 21, and 18) that they’d better get involved or they’re screwed.

So…

#1 reason to vote McCain = get the last 40% of the country to wise up.

Posted by: LibRick at July 30, 2008 07:57 PM
Comment #257343

BTW… I WAS NOT implying that all conservatives are uninformed. Nor was I implying that those here are not. On the contrary, the conservatives here seem to be quite informed (though, in my opinion, misguided.) I was saying that I have argued with some conservatives who cannot tell me why they take the stand they do. My family being prime examples. They drink the Kool-Aid. My mother, God lover her, is one of the kindest and most caring people I know, but she despises liberals. She cannot tell me why except that (and I quote) “they’re for Socialism, aren’t they? I know they’re for socialized medicine!”

Good job Sean and Rush.

Posted by: LibRick at July 30, 2008 08:03 PM
Comment #257364

Well, phx8, we’ll address yours first.

Currently, we are shipping dollars overseas to buy oil. If we produce more domestically, then we don’t ship as many dollars overseas. If we produce more domestically and the Saudi’s and everyone else keep producing as they are right now, then we will get a rise in production. If they can’t, because somehow the world seems to be floating on some magic oil bubble that you can’t draw more from then fine, we make more money here and don’t send it abroad.
The research is starting for alternatives, but the alternatives won’t be here for years. The current answer from the Democrats is “Let’s sit around, do nothing, enjoy the $4/gallon gas because it’s only going to get worse. Ride bikes, buses and public transportation. You don’t need your car.” I was on an environmental board a few weeks ago discussing this issue and was told that the electric cars were appropriate because “People don’t need to drive as much. Who care what they want. They only have to drive to the places that require distance occasionally, so let’s have a fleet of publicly owned rental gas cars that people can pay the government to rent and then they can take their family on the long trip.” This whole discussion is about freedom. It’s simple. There is oil. Peak oil theories are bunk. They are proving themselves out. We have found massive reserves that are available to pull out of the ground while we come up with viable alternative sources. Natural gas is about to become VERY plentiful and will replace a LOT of energy production in the short term. There was a huge find in Louisiana recently that’s got enough to fuel the entire country for the next 117 years by itself at the most reasonable estimates.

One additional question for you about Ghawar. How do you know for certain that it actually is being depleted. The Saudi’s adamently refuse to allow anyone other than their own scientists analyze the fields. The reasons have been speculated that it’s because it’s drying up, but other valid reasons could be they want to have the speculators think it is, and another 2-300 years of supply would hurt their artifically inflated oil prices.

You ignored my question about welfare. If you had looked at it, and thought about it and done a little research, you’d find that a huge budget fix we can do is “fix” welfare. Currently, the amount on a dollar that goes back to actual recepients is $0.135. That’s 13 1/2 cents on the dollar. That’s insane. Any other organization, the leaders would be herded into a police van and taken to the local slammer and tried for fraud.

LibRick, Obama IS for socialized medicine. He’s also for a massive tax on American citizens to spread the wealth to the world. Can we afford a $900 billion tax to help “global poverty”?

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 07:29 AM
Comment #257373

spacewarp:

You, sir are a revisionist, a liar and an idiot.

Are the Rules for Participation no longer being enforced in WB these days?

Spacewarp,
Right back at you, and btw, you were addressing a woman, not a man with your flamebait and nonsense.

As for Old Man McCain’s embarrassingly numerous flip-flops and gaffes:
Here is another link to a Master List that is being compiled.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at July 31, 2008 11:04 AM
Comment #257374

Spacewarp,
I’m not ignoring questions or points. There’s a lot I would like to address. “Welfare” is a great topic. Unfortunately, I can only do so much while I’m at work. Some days there’s more time to for this than others. My internet at home was down last night, and it has been off more than on for the past week. I have a LOT to say about that, but, moving right along…

The Saudis have not admitted any signs of exhaustion for their biggest oil field. However, they have repeatedly said they would increase production, and with high prices, they have every incentive to do so, along with other producers. However, it is not happening.

Peak Oil recognizes what is obvious. The supply of oil, or any commodity for that matter, is finite. We don’t even talk about the increases in other commodities because oil has seen such huge, readily visible increases. So while Peak Oil may part of it, and speculation may be part of it, and while I would agree domestic production is preferable to importing (unless drilling involves unacceptable risks to the environment), we’re still ignoring the gorilla in the middle of the room: the falling dollar.

The falling dollar is not occurring in a vacuum. It is caused by a number of factors, but I think the most important cause is debt, and future prospects in that regard.

Two more quick observations: First, Exxon reported the largest profits ever. It’s a new record; Second, 4th quarter GDP was revised down from positive .6 to negative .2 which means the official start of the recession will probably be last fall.

Posted by: phx8 at July 31, 2008 11:31 AM
Comment #257379

On drilling for more oil fields:

Sooner or later we’re probably going to have to open up ANWAR and more fields off the US coast…but I’m still against it for now.

Why?

We’re going to need oil for generations to come. If we were to open up everywhere for more drilling, sure, TEN YEARS from now the price might drop…but even then the amount of new oil wouldn’t make that great a difference. In fact, if I read the news stories rightly, some of the oil being pumped RIGHT NOW is being shipped to ASIA.

But I would say that we should see ANWAR and the protected coastal fields as something set aside for a rainy day. Sure, people think it’s raining now…but this ain’t nuthin’ compared to what WILL happen worldwide when the passing of ‘peak oil’ begins to make itself felt in the world economy.

In the meantime, we should concentrate on making cars more fuel-efficient (which the REPUBLICANS didn’t want to do, and now see Detroit getting its butt kicked by the overseas carmakers), and pouring as much as we possibly can into wind, solar, geothermal, AND nuclear power. With the exception of the last, the REPUBLICANS have historically given them almost NO support…and now see the result!

Just because we might have a little something extra right now doesn’t mean we should go get it right away. NOW is the time to TRULY concentrate on learning to stretch what we have as far as we can.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at July 31, 2008 12:52 PM
Comment #257382

Glenn,
I’ve thought the same. The foolishness of refusing to impose CAFE standards on American car makers beggars description. We desperately need top-down leadership to make BIG changes. I would not be averse to seeing tax credits and subsidies to making the changeover to electric cars as quickly as possible, with huge R&D help from the government to make sure the electric cars are as efficient as possible.

Although I like to think of myself as an environmentalist and Green and so forth, I would be willing to entertain the idea of drilling in ANWR. But it’s only one part of the equation. For some reason, the GOP seems obsessed with drilling our way out of this mess. It will take more, and that should only be a small part of the solution, NOT the sole focus. As you point out, any oil that is in the ground today is likely to become even more valuable as time goes by, so that’s definitely worth keeping in mind.

Spacewarp,
Federal spending needs reform. Social Security is a relatively easy fix. Nationalizing health care should address the horrendous problems with health care spending. But an even better candidate for huge cuts is military spending.

The War in Iraq is contributing a lot to the national debt. Spending on it has to drop dramatically.

We’re in a terrible financial mess, and all the trends are just plain scary. We have to make big changes. We have to. I’m pretty sure you and I agree about that. Obama seems to have some plans to make those changes. McCain seems to have, well, no ideas at all, other than doing more of what we have been doing. And if it makes you feel better, I think McCain as president might make more changes than he is indicating as a candidate. As a candidate, he’s doing very poorly. We’ll see…

Posted by: phx8 at July 31, 2008 01:17 PM
Comment #257383

Veritas, you’re right. That was uncivil of me. I do apologize.

As far as Obama’s gaffes, frankly, there are so many, that getting them all onto one page is proving to be a tough task.

http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=878
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/18/gaffemaster-alert-the-pearl-harbor-bomb/
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/obama-gaffes-on.html
http://scaredmonkeys.com/2008/07/24/obama-gaffe-o-meter-barack-obama-claimed-he-is-a-member-of-the-us-senate-banking-committee/
http://www.nepalibwatch.com/2008/07/13/barack-obama-gaffe-mania-i/
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/obamas_gaffe_some_perspective.php

These are just starting points.

There are many, many more. And that’s just mistakes. Errors. He’s got serious character flaws to go along with it. His associations with racists, terrorists, communists, criminals and the like. He’s shown a consistant pattern of poor choices, and now that he’s the press’ golden boy, all his failures are being covered up.

Phx8,
First off, sorry your internet connection isn’t working. Yes, you have a point about the dollar. It is extremely bad at this point, and needs to be rebuilt.

So far, we have a national crisis on debt. Currently, Americans owe more than 3.5 times the national GDP. That is unsustainable.

Yes. Exxon reported the largest profits ever. But, look at their profit versus percentage of operating expenses. They had profits of 8.5% again. Just they were selling a much more expensive product. I’m about to start my own business. I certainly don’t want the government telling me what is an acceptable level of profit. That would be despicable.

There is a LOT of room to move around in our budget and remove a LOT of the pork and get our national spending back under control. Putting Social Security partially into a privatization program to enhance returns and ensure that viability would be there could fix a lot of problems.

Obama has a plan of change and hope. Does he articulate what he’s going to change? Oil/natural gas production? Nope. Won’t allow that. Taxes? Sure, he’ll change them upwards. Military? Sure, he’ll change that. Pull our troops out of Iraq, potentially forcing us to actually lose a war that whether we should have been in or not, we’ve for all intents and purposes, nearly won. The economy? Sure. He’s going to raise the national debt, place nearly 1 trillion dollars of our money under the control of the United Nations, endebt us to every tinpot dictator in the world by signing on to the hairbrained Anthropogenic Global Warming hoax and increase the size of government by nearly another $1 trillion (if he gets all his campaign promises in).

Oh, and then there’s that little thing called personal freedom. He’s already announced he wants a public, domestic, armed civil enforcement organization. If that doesn’t scare the daylights out of you, then you’re not awake.

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 01:27 PM
Comment #257387

Here’s an interesting item. According to this blogger, some strategists he talked to said that the McCain Campaign was prepared to run an ad ripping Obama for using soldiers as campaign props. As it happens, Obama canceled that visit, having been told that a politically oriented visit was against regulation, so instead the McCain folks lashed him for not visiting.

When somebody goes back and forth like this concerning a certain value, you can tell that there’s no real priniciple involved. This is smearing for its own sake.

Spacewarp:
Obama might hem and haw when not prepared, but that’s typical. What’s not typical is the kind of intelligence that comes through in his answers. He’s not waiting several seconds to answer a surprise question like McCain did on the Viagra/Birth Control issue.

Meanwhile, McCain is the one who can’t live without a teleprompter. And he looks like it.

But that wouldn’t matter one bit if he talked about the issues more, and Obama less. He seems to be positively envious that Obama is getting all this attention and approval. You know, it could be because he represents a return to better governance, and he’s well spoken about that to boot.

As for the supposed AGW hoax? Look, they have the isotope profiles to prove that it’s fossil fuels that are pumping the CO2 out there, the modelling to back the assertion that it’s heating up the planet, and the melting ice and rising temperatures worldwide to back the claim that there’s something happening. Where’s your God Blessed proof of a hoax? I’m sure its some canard about solar irradiation (which hasn’t been consistent there during the warming), or some unscientific buy in to a cosmic cloud theory. Or maybe you’ll trot out the notion that you can double this trace gas in our atmosphere, which already contributes to a fifty degree difference in average temperatures, without the laws of physics going into operation and the gas trapping more heat. GOOD LUCK.

But as for drilling our way out of this problem? When you got T. Boone Pickens saying it can’t be done, why don’t you bend an ear and listen?

In truth, the Democrats have no desire to rely on oil, much less foreign oil to satisfy America’s energy needs. Our goal is to get off of that, and on to renewable energy. Even if the harebrained contrarianism is true, the fact remains that:
1) Oil remains a limited resource, and easy sources are drying up quickly.
2) We wouldn’t see much of this stuff for the better part of the decade.
3) Relying economically on an expensive, scarce energy source is a nice way to crater an economy.

Your problem is that Democrats aren’t merely making a better argument, they’re right. All you’re left with is energy company apologetics.

As for personal freedoms? Bush’s illegal wiretapping, his support for torture and the indefinite detainment of American citizens without habeas corpus seems to me to be a solid refutation of any claims your people have to being the authorities on freedom.

As with many subjects, it’s the Republicans who have brought the worst to pass, even as they’ve claimed the Democrats would be the ones to bring such travesties down on us.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 31, 2008 03:21 PM
Comment #257388

Spacewarp,

“Yes. Exxon reported the largest profits ever. But, look at their profit versus percentage of operating expenses. They had profits of 8.5% again. Just they were selling a much more expensive product. I’m about to start my own business. I certainly don’t want the government telling me what is an acceptable level of profit. That would be despicable.”

But surely you would accept the government subsidies.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 31, 2008 04:00 PM
Comment #257389

Stephen….

1) They’ve looked at the core samples and fossil records and there’s an 800 year gap between temperature rises and CO2 rises.
The planet has been MUCH warmer and MUCH cooler than it is right now.
The temperatures have gone DOWN in the last 8 years.
The fact that there have been glaciers in most of what’s now North America and tropical days in what’s now Alaska doesn’t seem to phase the AGW hoaxers. Considering the fact that you immediately try to assign me to whatever theory you seem to think you can disprove, shows you are a hoaxer.

2) I’m not saying drill our way out of it. I’m saying drill now and bring the prices back out of the stratosphere. THEN use EVERY effort we can to create viable, cost-effective and usable alternative energy sources. THEN we take the oil we’re still pumping out of the ground and sell it off to everyone else who has got to “peak” oil production. As far as “We wouldn’t see much of this stuff for the better part of the decade”…WRONG. Try 1 1/2 years. And probably sooner if we push hard. If you read what I’ve said, I never said that we need to continue to rely on oil. We need more of it now, and for the immediate future. We HAVE to have alternatives, and this scare shows it. Since Pelosi and co have taken over congress, gas prices have gone up on average 36%/year. In the previous 6 years, it was 8%/year.

My problem isn’t that the Democrats are making a better argument, and it CERTAINLY isn’t that they’re right. They’re FAR from that. It’s that they are fighting for more and more government every step they turn. Every step is one step closer to the government running our lives. And it’s wrong. Flat out wrong. It’s dangerous.

Obama appears idiotic when he talks about the 57 states he’s visited, or the dead people he sees in the audience when he’s giving a speech. He makes stuff up. Just flat out lies. He talked about how his parents met because of the marches in Selma and that’s how he was born. Problem is the marches happened AFTER HE WAS BORN. He can’t keep his stories straight. He pulls stuff out of air that will cause the crowd to empathize with him that just can’t stand up to scrutiny later.

He’s not a breath of fresh air. He’s rotten to the core. And one other thing. From the “they’re right” campaign…. Obama voted against a bill that would have required doctors that performed late-term abortions and failed to abort the baby and instead delivered a live baby, to treat and care for that baby. Can you POSSIBLY tell me there is ANY justification for voting to compel or allow doctors to sit there and watch a baby that was born, die because it was unwanted instead of caring for it? That’s just plain evil. That’s not “right”. That’s evil. It’s sick. It’s twisted. And it shows the rot in the core of his soul.

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 04:17 PM
Comment #257390

Would I accept government subsidies for my business? No. Why? Because it’s not right. If I can’t make my business work on it’s own, then why should the government, at the point of a gun, take money out of your pocket to pay for my business failing?

It’s morally corrupt.

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 04:19 PM
Comment #257391

Spacewarp,

“Would I accept government subsidies for my business? No. Why? Because it’s not right. If I can’t make my business work on it’s own, then why should the government, at the point of a gun, take money out of your pocket to pay for my business failing?

It’s morally corrupt.”

But it’s OK for the oil companies that are showing profits in the billions to do so?

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 31, 2008 04:30 PM
Comment #257392

Yes.

Posted by: spacewarp at July 31, 2008 04:34 PM
Comment #257393

So much for moral corruptness.

Posted by: Rocky Marks at July 31, 2008 04:42 PM
Comment #257396

Spacewarp,
Most of the past episodes of Global Warming have seen temperatures climb first, with CO2 rates following. You are correct. Most of those episodes can be tied to changes in the Earth’s orbit, precession, and tilt. The changes expose the Earth to more sunlight, and more solar irradation starts the warming, which makes temperatures climb, and that in turn sets off a feedback loop with CO2, which makes temperatures climb even more.

What is going on today cannot be attributed to any changes in the Earth’s orbit, solar irradiation, etc. Measureable warming is occurring, and the culprit has been identified as greenhouse gases, primarily CO2. The amounts of CO2 are measureable. The temperatures are measureable.

“John McCain will establish a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions…”
www.johnmccain.com

“We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great,” said McCain, the Arizona senator and presumptive Republican presidential nominee. “The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge.”
John McCain, May 13, 2008

Posted by: phx8 at July 31, 2008 04:56 PM
Comment #257400

Rocky, after you responded to my simple response, I went back and re-read your comment. I THOUGHT you said “But it’s corrupt for the oil companies that are showing profits in the billions to do so?”

(Remind self to look back at that speed-reading course again)

Is it OK? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Is that the better answer?

I think it’s morally bankrupt for them to do it.

Again, I don’t run the oil companies, so I can’t make them do anything.

If you want the Democrats to win some big points, simple. “In light of record profits from the big oil companies, the oil subsidies and money given from the federal government for any company that receives less than what their profits were for the 2008 fiscal year will no longer receive any subsidies” (The “less than what their profits were” comment being to protect the very small start-up oil firms).


Phx8,
Temperatures ARE mesurable. And since 2000, we’ve entered a period of cooling. The cries of warming have failed to materialize.

I believe firmly and solidly both John McCain and Barack Obama are wrong on this issue. I have not been a supporter of John McCain’s unless I see him being wrongly attacked on an issue. I’m firmly of the mindset that if he’s either winning North Carolina (where I’m at) by a landslide or losing by same said landslide, then I’m voting for a third party candidate (or as one person on another board so helpfully suggested, write in George Washington). Frankly, I believe Barack Obama is dangerous and wrong for the country. I don’t think he’s qualified to run for city council, nevertheless President of the United States.

I will be STRONGLY working on a third party organization. I believe the two-party system is broken. I believe that we need an alternative. I believe this election is a watershed election like 1852. I believe one of the two major parties is going to crash after this election. The parties have grown closer and closer. As you point out, the standardbearer for the Republicans is raising the flag for the Democrat platform on AGW. It’s wrong, wrong wrong.

The Republicans had control of the house, the senate, the white house and spent like crazy. So, people decided to put the Democrats in the house and senate. And they’ve done worse for the country since. Gas was going up at an astronomical 8% annually. Now, thanks to Pelosi and gang, it’s going up 36% annualy. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that’s the wrong direction.

The banking crisis is one of those issues where there’s enough blame for everyone to go around, but the Democrats CLEARLY have more responsibility for this mess. Chris Dodd and friends have taken sweetheart loan deals from banks, and then in turn, had the same banks write the proposed legislation that they then turned around and sponsored. Nearly 1/2 of the upper management at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are Clinton friends. It reeks. The whole thing is a mess.

As far as crime and corruption, the Democrats swept in on the claim they would be the “most ethical” in history. Yet, there’s scandal after scandal and it’s almost always Democrats. The latest two scandals to be announced were both Republicans. And look at them.

One, a woman complains to her sister, who happens to be governor, that her ex-husband has tasered her son and threatened to kill their father. The ex-husband is a state trooper. She then asks for an investigation into the claims. Instead of asking that he be fired, she asks that he be moved to a position that doesn’t allow him a firearm until the investigation is cleared up. During the investigation, they find he drove his trooper vehicle while drunk, and his own confession that he tried the taser on his son to see if it worked. There was no alegation that she did ask for the trooper’s firing. (He should have been) Yet, because she fired his manager later for improprieties, he’s now claiming she pressured him to fire her ex-brother-in-law.

The other was a claim that a sitting senator didn’t do his paperwork. He had received gifts that were legal to receive, but didn’t file the proper paperwork and so, he was indicted on charges related to it.

On the other hand, we have a sitting representative who is found with $90,000 in cash in bribe money in his freezer and no charges are brought. Why? Because he has a D after his name. We have a sitting senator who takes a $75,000 bribe from a bank in the form of a sweetheart deal to write legislation that favors…..the banks. Actually, he didn’t write the legislation. It was later leaked that the bank wrote it, and he just put his name on the top. Any charges? No. Of course not. Want to guess what party he belongs to?

We have another case of a senator who decided to have a little fun and publicly question the solvency of a bank that wasn’t on the FDIC’s watchlist. And what happened? It became insolvent in three days. Citizens lost over a billion dollars. Any guess as to what party he belongs to?

We’ve got to make a change. We’ve got to do something to get our government under control. Barack Obama isn’t that change. He’s an empty suit that wants to run up every tax he can.


Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 05:29 PM
Comment #257404

Spacewarp-
You don’t have to prove that CO2 started every period of global warming to demonstrate that it’s responsible for this one. It can be a secondary factor, and its affects on climate, it’s absorption of heat, and it’s correlation to warming trends has been demonstrated.

It is true that the planet has gone through much worse warm periods, and much more serious cooldowns. Trouble with this line of argument is that we don’t have to beat records for such weather changes to be problematic for us.

Our experience as a civilized human race has mainly been in a rather pleasant and mild period of weather that’s been going on since about 8000 years ago. It is this that we’re adapted to. This climate is what we’ve arranged our infrastructure and our cities to accomodate. It’s been literally ages since we’ve been faced with any truly radical shift in Earth’s temperature.

Global warming will make much of the arrangements we had obsolete, just as the Natufi culture’s arrangement with the former Sahara Grasslands changed when a cooling trend dried out the area.

As for what temperatures have done, I think it should be obvious to anybody who’s looked at a temperature graph that temperatures don’t just monolithically rise and fall. Additionally, I wonder, how are you measuring the difference in temperature? Are we talking cooler relative to the temperatures of, say, the mid-eighties, or cooler relative to the record highs of the late nineties?

As for Glaciers, I would remind you that they are retreating in much of the world, and especially fast in polar regions, where AGW theory had predicted we would see the most considerable rises in temperatures.

You can call me a hoaxer, you can call me a banana creme pie with a cherry on top, but it’s your case to prove, and you’ve never proved it.

Relating to the second part of your comment, let me say this. First they will have to run tests on these regions. Then they will have to engineer the platforms. Then they will have to drill, and then the prices will have to adjust to the new supply, which they will do in terms of the current market at that point It is naive to believe that a year and a half will be all it takes to get oil out of the ground.

As for the abortion procedure you describe, It’s still very legal for a doctor to pull apart that fetus limb from limb within the uterus at the same age with forceps even so, these are rare, only 5.4 percent of pregnancies terminated beyond 16 weeks, 1.4 beyond 20 weeks. We’re not talking, usually, a full grown, viable child pulled out and killed. The Intact Dilation and Extraction, the procedure described by the term “partial birth abortion”, is most often used for dead or unviable fetuses, often for the health of the mother. One reason given for it, far from being the cold butchery that conservatives paint it as, is to give parents mourning for the dead or unviable baby the opportunity to have a largely intact child. Would you prefer they console themselves with their pieces of the child who would never be born alive?

You talk about Obama not being a breath of fresh air. Sorry we can’t oblige you. But he’s a breath of fresh air to somebody who prefers greater intelligence and class from his candidates.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 31, 2008 05:38 PM
Comment #257409

What period of cooling?

The appearance of such may have more to do with natural variability than the lack of global warming. More to the point, as the article points out, eight of the warmest years on record have taken place in the last ten years.

As for warming evidence failing to materialize, the evidence of warming in the polar regions is well documented. They found a huge section of ice that had melted and refrozen at the south pole. Gravitational measurements have confirmed the loss of huge amounts of ice. Permafrost is creeping north.

Why is this so important? Real Estate. Or, location, location, location. The Polar regions are recording temperature rises out of proportion to the rest of the planet. In the case of solar radiation increases, the warmth would be more evenly spread. With CO2 dominated AGW, the warming trend is most pronounced in the polar regions, at night, during winter… or in other words, times when heat is supposed to escape.

That’s what scientists have seen.

But go on claiming its a hoax. It’s easier than proving its a hoax. The irony here is that your position is essentially born of the corrupt politics of industry that was part and parcel of the corruption of both Democrats and Republicans.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at July 31, 2008 05:51 PM
Comment #257412

The Saudis have been pumping salt water at high pressure into their oil sands for years now to keep producing. They are way past their peak, and ready for collapse.

On global warming, the local daily here is griping about cow flatulence, and the whole beef and dairy industry, excepting those who recapture the methane. All this ignores the fact that global warming has good effects in addition to the negatives. We’re adaptable, we’ll adapt.

The most interesting thing here, is trying to figure out who Spacewarp was before the big meltdown, but I think he may be right about the collapse of the duopoly.

Posted by: ohrealy at July 31, 2008 06:17 PM
Comment #257419

Figuring out who I am is simple. I’m new to this particular forum.

I don’t particularly care whether it’s the Republicans who, when given the chance, raced madly to embrace big government, or the Democrats who have for years and years, gladly wrapped their legs around the body of big government and given every last part of themselves to it, but I truly believe that one of the two is going to go shortly.

Theories:

Obama wins and the Dems gain seats. The Democrats then try to get through every provision he wants, and see just how far he wants to take things and revolt against him, tearing the party apart.

Obama loses (Don’t know why my fingers want to type Boama tonight, but if I do it, forgive me, it’s been a long day already) and the Dems gain seats. McCain tries to keep the Dems in check. The dems in the populous go nuts trying to figure out how they lost again. Causes riots in the streets. Majority of liberal Dems decide that they can’t take the rightward turn the party made, and break ranks, jump to Green Party and create an ideological liberal party. The remainder join in with the Republicans. The conservative Republicans (and a LOT of independants) either join a young third party that’s libertarian in process but not Libertarian in name. (The L party has a bad brand identity. Too much into the “pot party” mindset in most people’s minds. Too much infighting (see loyalty oath and other issues with the L party).) I would be willing to bet that it’s going to be something that’s currently just formed or is in the process of forming. Then we will have a true Conservative major party, a true Liberal major party and a liberal-moderate Republican party.

Obama loses and Republicans gain seats. Dems crumble. Most join the Greens. Few join the Libertarian or Republican parties. The conservatives do not have a voice for a long time to come unless they start their own party.

Obama wins and Republicans gain seats. Dems panic as to how they lost the house or senate or both. They draw in most of the Greens and most of the conservative Dems leave the party. Move to the Republicans. Most conservatives move to create or join a conservative party.

Granted, this is all idle speculation. I don’t see the duopoly lasting much longer. The last 4 or 5 races have become more and more devisive and more vicious every race.

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 07:24 PM
Comment #257429

ohrealy-
The problem with global warmings good effects is that we don’t have sufficient predictive power to figure out who the winners and losers are. Additionally, it’s kind of difficult to enjoy the good effects if you’re having to compensate for some kind of negative at the same time.

We’ll adapt, but how much adaptation set us back? And who will end up in a good position?

As for the collapse of the duopoly? People have got to have something to move towards. I doubt people are in very much of a mood for more conservatism. They’ve had their fill. You may complain that it was not pure, but no real world political system is. You had your best chance, and you guys blew it.

The trouble with most of the third parties is that they have no real base, and probably won’t have it until one of the two big parties collapse, splinters, or sees mass defections.

I’ve seen these kind of theories you have before. Democrats used them all the time. Didn’t do us an ounce of good, because what we didn’t capitalize on was the fact that cultural conservatism is more or less dead as those at the start of the Reagan Revolution understood it. And we didn’t have the movement flaming out, and Democrats putting together some feasible answer to the Right Wing’s media machine.

The expectations out there among the political consultants, left and right, are that the Republicans will lose additional seats. Obama may or may not win, but he’s running ahead of McCain and all McCain can do is tell Obama to get off his lawn.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 1, 2008 01:27 AM
Comment #257435

I don’t think conservatism is dead. I think a vast amount of people want less government in their lives. They just haven’t been given a voice so have just given up on the process.

I think the reason 1994 had the effect it did was that basically, there was hope. Hope that people would get the onerous government monkey off our backs. And thus the massive voting from conservatives.

Look at 2006, MOST of the new Democrats that came into office were more conservative than their Republican counterparts.

I seriously think if you believe that conservatism is dead, then you’re deluding yourself.

A few years ago, I was part of a new third party movement. It was well planned, but political infighting caused a massive problem for us, and the party ended. I’m not the worlds most eleoquent speaker, but I am proud to say that I did a 1 hour radio interview during the middle of the day (lowest listening audience for the station) and before the end of the next day, we had 500 new members from that area.

Most people seem to have a yearning for two things. Get the government out of our pocketbook and our bedroom.

Seriously Stephen, you don’t think we’d be better served by a much smaller organization of our welfare system that had many less managers and much more responsiveness to the “clients”? Imagine if we took the nearly 480 organizations devoted to welfare and medical care in the Federal government and sliced out all the overhead. Consolidated it down to 6 organizations. Put the top 10% of workers from each organization into posts in this new structure. We had one that concentrated on cash disbursements, one that concentrated on housing, one that concentrated on job placement and creation, one that concentrated on food, one that concentrated on medical and one that concentrated on special cases. We could get rid of so much overhead it isn’t even funny. We’d be able to cut some $600 billion out of our federal budget.

Imagine if we streamlined the tax code. Dropped out the over 1.1 million lines of our tax code and put in a tax code that could be addressed in 1-2 pages. Gutted the IRS and put in a pure calculation and collection system with a small enforcement arm.

Imagine if we streamlined the Department of Education. What would happen if we took the $77 BILLION that’s dedicated to NON-SCHOOL line items for the DOE and put that back to the states in grants? If we ran a small force of some 2-3000 people and gave grants, promoted collection and reporting of school scores and worked on streamlining ordering processes and building contracts to assist state and local school systems in providing minimal costs to be able to fund more programs for students and schools.

These are not proposals that you’ll see from John McCain’s camp. They’re too radical. Because they make sense and would work. They would be such a foreign concept to Barack Obama’s campaign that he might have conniption fits about them.

The proposals I just tossed out there (and there are many more where that came from) are some simple cost savers that could save us upwards of the $900 billion Global Poverty Tax that Obama has proposed.

Posted by: Spacewarp at August 1, 2008 08:41 AM
Comment #257485

Spacewarp-
You think a lot of things. Check your beliefs against the facts.

1994 was your peak. After that you saw Clinton elected twice, and Republican numbers slide downwards.

As for 2006, while some new Democrats were conservative, the distribution was more even. The party expanded in both directions, and retook the center.

What people want is government that works. They want an economy where being a small fry isn’t a one way ticket to the poorhouse. Big or small, it’s the use they get out of it that they’re interested in.

The real question is whether your plans work, or whether you simply want them to work. The Republicans tried for years to do things their way, and what essentially happened was that programs that functioned well under the Democrats, like FEMA, cratered.

People are burnt out on conservatism. The polls show it.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 1, 2008 06:29 PM
Comment #257492

On global warming, we had 30 freeze and thaw cycles this winter in Chicago, and enough rain/sleet/snowfall to keep the Des Plaines River at a very high level all year. Usually, in the fall, it becomes shallow enough for a dog to run across.

The local Lutheran churches are handing out water at the train stations, and the same thing is happening at Lollapallooza, which is practically next to Lake Michigan, which now has a water temperature of 77 degrees, which is ridiculous. It’s not Tampa Bay.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 1, 2008 07:07 PM
Comment #257550

I’m not even sure if I’m allowed to post here anymore. I guess we will see.

Same ol’ same ol’ I see.

Do be sure to help Senator Obama with his struggling as a bi-racial. I’m quite sure you, Mr. Huntwork, are well acquainted with the “struggle” of being anything other than white in America.

Posted by: Kim-Sue at August 2, 2008 08:43 PM
Comment #257575

LibRick, Obama IS for socialized medicine. He’s also for a massive tax on American citizens to spread the wealth to the world. Can we afford a $900 billion tax to help “global poverty”?

Posted by: Spacewarp at July 31, 2008 07:29 AM

Spaceewarp, we effectively already have what you so derisively call ‘socialized medicine’. The poor get treatment at local hospitals and clinics and taxpayers pay. The only difference in today’s health care system and a national healthcare system is who pays how much, who makes money off the system and how much, and who is able to get the best care.

In today’s ‘freemarket’ system, the wealthy make the money off the system, the wealthy have their medical care subsidized by middleclass taxpayers, and are provided tax dodges to make the middleclass pay for the poor’s health care.

So, in my mother’s case, the Republicans have convinced her that it is in her best financial interest to pay all the taxes and let the wealthy reap the benefits of better health care. My mother and father are on fixed incomes and depend on Medicare and Medicaid. Yet they are firmly in the ‘anti-socialized medicine’ camp even though they themselves benefit from ‘socialized medicine’.

All in all, the conservatives and Republicans have done a superlative job of presenting ‘free market’ ideas which benefit an extremely small segment of the population to the masses. I can’t even convince mom and dad that it is not ‘free market’ to have government no-bid contracts, farm subsidies, tax breaks for investments that the wealthy use when efforts don’t pay off and still get to keep when they pay off big time. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae investors are protected from losses and get to keep earnings. Why are there tax breaks on homeownership? This is no free market society. Our tax and market system is completely beneficial to the wealthy.

It’s laughable to hear neighbors who make $200,000 per year and contribute so little to the economy complain about being mistreated by the government. They were educated in state and federal subsidized schools. They live in houses subsidized by taxbreaks that the poor don’t get. They are protected by police subsidized by neighbors who may not need the police services. They buy stock in big oil companies who use the armed services to protect profits and foreign investments.

Yeah, it’s a joke. We’re already socialists. It’s just a matter of who’s paying and who’s getting.

Posted by: LibRick at August 3, 2008 01:49 PM
Comment #257586

Well said, LibRick! I couldn’t agree more.
I myself have made it a personal rule not to argue with those who start off responding to my comments by labeling me a liar and an idiot the way spacewarp did (even when followed by apologies), but if I had chosen to respond to his/her nonsensical post, my points would have fallen directly along the same kind of lines as yours.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 3, 2008 04:30 PM
Comment #257891

Only reason John McCain should not be president: Another 100 years in Iraq.

Posted by: Michael at August 6, 2008 02:18 PM
Comment #258559

I checked it out and the blogs concerning the Bible prophecy concerning Iraq and 9/11 being in the Bible. These reports declaring this information are not a hoax but are true! Don’t take my word for it just check it out yourself.

How did they discover this in the Bible? I have seen those passages several times in the Bible and skipped over them because they made no sense to me.
After watching the you tube video on line and following it with my Bible the lights have turned on brighter than the sun!

This is truly a prophecy about Iraq and also 911. Blogs out there actually under-state the power of this Bible discovery as you will see.
Why has this not yet become national news yet? Is Satan trying to stop this? I almost chickened out from watching
the you tube after a feeling of negative pressure tried to discourage me from viewing the entire presentation.
That negative feeling turned out to be false, had I given in to that pressure and ran away then I would not have
awakened to this marvelous news.
My heavens, I am feeling chills down my back just an hour after watching this. All you bloggers out there please do not take offense but everything you are discussing today just got dwarfed by something far more enlightening than

anything you can possibly imagine!

It is like lightening has struck and every affected christians has slept through it! What ever you do in this life you must see this entire you tube. See…

Bible prophecies of 9/11

www.eternaltruth.net


Posted by: Brenda Paul at August 14, 2008 08:51 PM
Comment #259253

barack obama sucks

Posted by: ashley at August 23, 2008 09:33 AM
Comment #267940

barack obama stinks. GO SARAH AND JOHN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM BEING SARAH FOR HALLOWEEN!! LOVE U GUYZ SAVE OUR COUNTRY!

Posted by: Lauren Janet at October 22, 2008 07:05 PM
Comment #267941

oh and if ppl dont like john mccain then why are u on this website? go to barack ostupidheads website and right your ignarent comments. REMEMBER NOBAMA!

Posted by: Lauren Janet at October 22, 2008 07:09 PM
Comment #268498

I wrote something similar. Unfortunately, it looks like he’s going to win because Bush destroyed the Republican party.

Posted by: Brad G at October 27, 2008 06:15 PM
Post a comment