The Myth of Drill, Baby, Drill and the Slush Fund

The Myth of Drill, Baby, Drill

You know how if you hear the same foolishness enough times, it becomes second nature and you don’t stop to question it. That has been the case with me and “Drill, Baby, Drill”, the chant heard around the country telling us that we need to drill off shore so we can achieve energy independence. I always dismissed the argument because most of the world’s oil simply isn’t off our shores so total reliance on off shore oil would not satisfy our oil addiction. Alas, I was dismissing it for the wrong reason and thanks to a piece by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, I now see what should have been obvious to me.

When we drill in the Gulf of Mexico, we don’t use that oil in Charleston or Atlanta or Boise or Boston. That oil goes into a global pool of oil that is sold by the oil companies to anyone willing to pay for it. There is no such thing as our using the oil that we drill close to home. We don’t contribute to our energy independence by off shore drilling. We just contribute to the world supply of the drug that so many countries are addicted to, although none of them match our level of addiction. 2007 data shows we consume 24% of the worlds oil. So the argument made by Maddow, a correct one I think, is that we need to get off oil. That is true energy independence.

The Myth of the Slush Fund

Last week, Republican Congressman from Texas, Joe Barton made the news when he apologized to BP for our country strong-arming them into creating a 20 billion dollar relief fund for victims of the BP oil spill. He called the meeting between Obama and BP a “shake down” and the resulting financial set-aside a “slush fund”. Conspiracies abound regarding how this money will be misused. Kenneth Feinberg, the man who administered the 9/11 relief fund has been put in charge of this new Gulf fund. According to conservatives it’s all totally unconstitutional. Well let’s do a small side by side comparison of the 9/11 fund and the Gulf fund.

9/11 Fund Gulf Fund
Established during GOP Bush administration. Established during socialist Obama administration.
America screwed over by dark-skinned fanatic Muslims. America screwed over by Christian capitalist Brits.
Many of the victims fat cat wall street types. Many of the victims ordinary folks who work with their hands.
Socially responsible relief fund. Unconstitutional, criminal, slush fund.

One has to wonder why a relief method administered by the same man during the Bush administration is suddenly under attack under the Obama administration. The bottom line is we live in a litigious society. Expecting people to get financial relief from this folly through the court system is cruel and unusual. A fund that provides timely relief and ensures that BP bears the cost of that relief is the most humanitarian and just approach.

Once again, no degree of hypocrisy is too great in the pursuit of a failed Obama administration. It’s just a shame when Republicans ignore that people’s lives hang in the balance.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

226 thoughts on “The Myth of Drill, Baby, Drill and the Slush Fund

  1. Rutherford, I notice that your fund comparison didn’t get into where the money for each fund came from.

    When you get into that, you will find you are comparing apples to oranges.

  2. There are some significant and glaring errors in your judgment.

    First, the 911 fund:

    The September 11th Victim Compensation Fund was created by an Act of Congress, the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (49 USC 40101)[1], shortly after 9/11 to compensate the victims of the attack (or their families) in exchange for their agreement not to sue the airline corporations involved.

    Now BP. Let’s think about this for a second. Attorney General Holder went to Louisiana at the beginning of June to start civil and criminal investigations with the full intent of prosecuting “to the fullest extent of the law”. Now, do you think it might be just a wee bit inappropriate for the actively investigating AG to be at a meeting where BP happens to agree to, at the significant urging of the Administration- who controls the AG, an unprecedented sum of cash prior to any due process?

    Did anything illegal happen? We don’t know. Was it negligence? We don’t know. Do we even know what happened? No, we have speculations on what caused the accident, but nothing more than that. Yet, here you are on the left, celebrating what is amounting to the extortion (yes, extortion) of $20 billion dollars from a private entity by the Government, who has promised an independent manager, who happens to be a paid senior advisor to the President.

    Any time you have the WH Chief of Staff gloating about how the Administration forced BP to put up the funds- without any due process- you should be very concerned about the rule of law.

    The concessions from BP are victories for Obama, particularly the $100 million fund for oil rig workers displaced by the moratorium. Carol Browner, Obama’s energy adviser, suggested the White House had no legal authority to force BP to pay lost wages. “There’s a very significant legal question about their liability,” Browner told reporters.
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38612.html#ixzz0rZJhaysp

    No one on the right is against holding BP accountable. However, Our anger at BP does not supersede our respect for the rule of law and our fundamental documents.

    Let’s stop the leak, let’s see what happened, AND THEN let’s look to punish those that are wrong. We have due process for a reason, and mob anger and political expediency are the main reasons why we have due process.

  3. R, if you really wanted to have an honest post, you’d compare the similarities between BP and the Federal Government in their culpability in the Deepwater Horizon spill.

    PRE-SPILL:
    ~~ It was the Administration’s MMS, charged with inspecting and regulating Deepwater Horizon, of which it failed to do.

    ~~It was the Administration’s Ken Salazar and his Interior Department that was charged, according to Obama as his #1 priority, to clean up the MMS, of which he failed to do in 18 months.

    ~~It is the Dem controlled House and Senate who have oversight over the Administration, of which they failed to regulate the Interior Department or the MMS.

    POST-SPILL:
    ~~ It has been the EPA, the Coast Guard, FEMA, the Interior Department and the Department of Homeland Defense that have completely botched up the reaction to the crisis, though I’ll give the Coast Guard a little bit of a pass because of their size and other responsibilities.

  4. The left is atwitter at the comments of General Stan McCrystal, where he derides Holbrooke and Eikenberry, and apparently isn’t overly impressed with Jones or Biden. The general consensus among the left is that he’s guilty of insubordination and that he should be fired.

    Ok, I’ll bite on the insubordination and would probably agree that if the Obama WH wants to maintain control over the situation, then they’ll have to be proactive in this, which probably means that McCrystal won’t survive his summons.

    But what got them to this point?

    Trust is a fickle thing. All the at-a-boys in the world are erased by one uh-oh. If you wanted a case in point, look to the CIA and their sense of betrayal on behalf of this Administration. The Pentagon and the DoD writ large have been on the cusp of feeling that same sense of betrayal. From Obama’s dithering on the Afghan strategy, and then his down grading of McCrystal’s request, on top of an unrealistic timeline for withdrawal, one has to question Obama’s commitment to the mission.

    That’s important. The military has been burned before, and when it sees waffling on the part of civilian leadership, it gets really nervous. Any one who has worked with Richard Holbrooke knows that he’s a pre-Madonna and an arrogant ass. He’s not liked by anyone at the State Department, of which he expected to be named Secretary of, and the inside baseball is that he’s been named persona no grata in Afghanistan. Karzai doesn’t want to meet him because he’s such an ass.

    Biden is a fucking joke, so it’s no wonder that he’s the butt of a few. The fact that Biden was pushing for drone strikes as a strategy to deal with an insurgency is ludicrous and shows why most people with even a basic understanding of strategy laugh at him.

    At the end of the day, I think McCrystal just doesn’t trust the WH and this article by Rolling Stone (two Rolling Stone articles in week recommended by me, that must be some sort of record!) is an undistilled, impolitic view into what McCrystal is and has been dealing with.

    Remember when McCrystal was asked when was the last time he spoke to the President, and he immediately answered that he hadn’t spoken to the President in three months. Three months?! Odierno and Petreaus spoke with Bush daily. It’s hard to feel like the Administration is interested and has your back when they don’t talk to you…

  5. Amazing how much time you people have on your hands….

    😉

    Just a quick note – I have said this before but it is critical.

    The Exxon Valdez settlement is still tied up in the courts. Is that really what you guys want to see happen this time? You know that is exactly where this would all end up had Obama not shown some guts and acquired the 20 billion up front.

  6. Hmmmmmm, I was just wondering, is there a comparison between Obama’s waiting some 60 days to make a decision on Afghanistan and his waiting about 50 days before doing anything on the Gulf Oil spill?

    Maybe it takes him a couple months to make up his mind…

  7. One of the untold stories – and as far as I know, unknown – is how Obama actually managed to pull this off.

    People claim that this “shakedown” is unconstitutional. I am curious about the logic there – because as far as I can tell from the constitution Obama does not actually have the power to force BP to do anything. Since Obama does not actually have the power to “force” BP into doing this – how did he get them to do it? Why didn’t they just say “No, sorry, see you in court….”

    I suspect that there was a whole lot of negotiating going on behinds closed door – stuff we are not at present privy to.

    You can’t really claim something is unconstitutional when BP went along with it voluntarily.

  8. HP, I answered on the last post…

    Gorilla, if you mean on the old thread, I believe you said it was unconstitutional. In #10 above I argue that I don’t think it is unconstitutional.

  9. Specifically I said that expediency (in the case of Valdez) does not outweigh our founding documents.

    There has been no due process in this. You’re right, we don’t know what was said, but the fact that Holder was in the room, while hes actively investigating BP with the stated intent to prosecute them, makes it somewhat dubious.

    We have laws, we have courts, we have a process for doing this. Rahm bragging about how the Administration “forced” BP to fund the escrow account doesn’t sound very voluntary to me.

    This is just another example of the thugocracy and extra-constitutional actions of this administration.

  10. This is just another example of the thugocracy and extra-constitutional actions of this administration.

    Gorilla, I suspect indeed that Obama made them an offer they couldn’t refuse.

    That may sound like thuggery to you. It sounds like hard negotiation to me.

    Perhaps Obama said: If you take this to court we will make sure you will have such bad publicity as a result that no American will ever buy from BP again…..

    That is playing hardball – but it is hardly unconstitutional.

  11. Huck said: Rutherford, I notice that your fund comparison didn’t get into where the money for each fund came from.

    When you get into that, you will find you are comparing apples to oranges.

    OK – let’s do that.

    i9/11 fund – Money provided by the American taxpayers

    Gulf fund – Money provided by BP stockholders.

    Thanks, Huck. I can see how that puts an entirely different spin on Rutherford’s facts.

  12. If the word “fungible” isn’t in your vocabulary, now would be an excellent time to look it up. Oil is a “fungible” commodity.

    BP is a foreign corporation drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. When American consumers buy Gulf oil from BP, how exactly does that reduce our reliance on foreign oil?

    “Drill baby, drill” is an empty and mindless slogan chanted by mindless morons.

  13. It does put a different spin on the fact.

    The fed had standing with the 911 fund. They don’t have standing with the BP escrow fund.

    So really, who’s the mindless moron in this discussion?

  14. Gorilla, of course it’s racist. It’s about Obama. All criticism of this president has its roots in racism, right? I mean, NY firefighters upset at t a president that wanted to try the terrorists that killed their brothers in a civilian court? What would cause firefighters in NY to be upset at Obama?

    Now the real question here, is how do we address the outrage over the depiction of the Unabomber?

  15. G-chin, why did your saviour insist on increased drilling along the Atlanta coastline then?

    First, he isn’t my “saviour.” I voted for him but I don’t worship him., and I frequently disagree with him. If you were asking a sincere question instead of just being a jerk, you wouldn’t load the question up like that.

    I don’t oppose all offshore drilling. I can’t speak for Obama, but apparently he doesn’t oppose all offshore drilling either. Offshore drilling can be done safely if the operators aren’t looking to cut every corner possible to save a few bucks – like a certain company that made a boo-boo in the Gulf.

    The federal government receives substantial royalties from offshore oil and gas production. Perhaps Obama has some interest in getting the deficit under control. You remember the deficit? The one that “conservatives” are always whining about?

    (Atlanta is inland and doesn’t have a coastline. Did you mean “Atlantic” coastline?)

  16. There’s so many errors in this post to address.

    Remember, this is the same woman Rutherford quotes that thought drilling in ANWAR even more dangerous than drilling in mile deep water, and used that as justification in denouncing drilling in Alaska on MSNBC. To the best of my knowledge, her abject stupidity of physics was never called – all too common misinformation that burns the ears of liberals and stands as good science and future business models. 🙄

    I wish people wouldn’t listen to hacks like Butch Madcow, because they have no idea of what they are talking about, and it really misleads the public into believing there is no benefit to domestic drilling. Butch gleans her information from the same farces that are selling global warming, stopped nuclear production, and burn down SUV dealerships.

    See this list Rutherford?

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/refineries.htm

    These are domestic refineries. Do you see BP refineries?

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/rankings/refineries.htm

    Do you know who supplies a majority of the contracts at these refineries? Do you have any idea who is supplying a majority of the gasoline you put in your car? Would you like OPEC to have the exclusive ability to set the price of crude oil, therefore the price of diesel, heating oil, aviation fuel, feed stocks for virtually every industry, and your price at the pump? Do you understand the concept of a cartel? Do you understand the danger? Do you wish for energy dependence?

    Currently and for the foreseeable future, there are no viable options vis-a-vis hydrocarbons to power American industry. Not even close. We could have alleviated some dependence by nuclear, but the Butch Madcow types were able to stop the creation of the facilities by scare tactics over 30 years ago. Now they are doing it again. Ask yourself why crude oil the one commodity we are willing to go to war Rutherford – there are no viable alternatives at present.

    Good people from the right. I believe we get closer to the day in deciding this. Do we stay and fight – or do we up and leave? Industry leaves, but the people are forced to remain under the tyranny of ignorance called liberalism. If you want to become Mexico within a decade, I highly suggest you gird your loins and get ready.

    Because that is exactly what it is going to take if King George Obama and his ilk remain in authority too much longer. We are running out of time.

  17. G-chin, why did your saviour insist on increased drilling along the Atlanta coastline then?

    Tigre, you know the answer. He was offering that for exchange for votes on his climate bill. Given the BP events, it has to rank as one of the most ill-times political moves in history.

  18. If you read this article, they claim that the image is racist. I’d like to poll the forum, is this racism or just politics?

    It might surprise you, Gorilla, but I don’t think it is racist. Poor taste, perhaps, but not racist.

  19. Ape, I can’t tell if that stuff is racist or not. It requires guessing at the exact opinions and motivations of someone who compares Obama to a terrorist and calls him a “hustler.”

    I happen to believe that much of the Obama-hatred that we see is motivated by racism. I believe that because in my long life I have never seen such irrational hatred from Americans except from the craziest, most extreme racists – the kind who join the American Nazi Party, the White Citizens’ Council, or the KKK.

    Do you believe that ANY of the unbelievable, over-the-top animus directed at Obama is motivated by his race, or his Islamic name? A simple “yes” or “no” will do?

  20. I believe that because in my long life I have never seen such irrational hatred from Americans except from the craziest, most extreme racists – the kind who join the American Nazi Party, the White Citizens’ Council, or the KKK.

    Either the shortest memory in all of eternity, or the worst liar. A picture(s) – hundreds of them – is worth a thousand words.

    http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

  21. There’s so many errors in this post to address.

    Then why didn’t you address them instead of going directly ad hominem at Rachel Maddow?

    Those BP refineries were Amoco refineries until 1998, and operated with much better safety records before the takeover.

  22. I happen to believe that much of the Obama-hatred that we see is motivated by racism. I believe that because in my long life I have never seen such irrational hatred from Americans except from the craziest, most extreme racists – the kind who join the American Nazi Party, the White Citizens’ Council, or the KKK.” — Chin

    You mean these people?

    http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=anti-bush+protests&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=5sYgTNfFAcKB8gbUobRu&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQsAQwAA&safe=active

  23. Just as an aside, the paper did a poll on that article asking that very question. Results thus far:

    Was this simply a political statement, or a case of racism against the President?

    Racism 3%
    Politics 97%

  24. “I believe that because in my long life I have never seen such irrational hatred from Americans except from the craziest, most extreme racists – the kind who join the American Nazi Party, the White Citizens’ Council, or the KKK.”

    Did you mean except from the left during Bush’s term?

    As for being a jerk, I think your sarcastic comments begged a sarcastic response. Sorry that touched a nerve. And thanks for correcting me after I had already done so myself.

    So, is it fair to say that Rutherford’s hypothesis that there’s no benefit to domestic drilling when it comes to dependence is not accurate?

  25. A Tale of Two Disasters

    “…
    Mr. Bush was a Republican, and elected Democrats controlled Louisiana and New Orleans, the main victims of Katrina. Many claimed Mr. Bush neglected New Orleans for this reason. Mr. Obama is a Democrat, and the states affected by Deepwater Horizon—Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida—all have Republican governors. I have not seen anyone, even on the right, claim that the ineffectual response of the Obama administration is due to partisan politics.

    The final difference is in the press handling of the two issues.
    …”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704895204575320560421570360.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

  26. Then why didn’t you address them instead of going directly ad hominem at Rachel Maddow?

    Butch Madcow is a rank propagandist like you, who damages the country with her misinformation. She neither warrants, nor deserves my respect.

    But I did address the issues by asking Rutherford a series of questions. Read it again and try to go slow this time dummy.

    Oil is a fungible product, but only to the extent the refineries can process the crude. Not all crude can be processed at all refineries – which is a huge advantage to the U.S. refineries that are continually demonized by the useless EPA.

    Remember the greenies and their demands of MTBE by added? Too bad we found it poisoned the watershed. This is what I’ve come to expect from environmentalists.

    Here’s more rank lies from liberal government and Racial Madcow that proved unfounded. No apology will be forthcoming, of course. Sweep it under the mat like all liberals continually do.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/greens-apologize-to-high-yield-farmers/

    Never leave good science or economic policy to progressives, as they are proven liars, hacks and shills.

  27. What does a guy like Rabbit do when he simply doesn’t understand the issue?

    I admit, I don’t have a sound understanding of the world oil market. In fact, I have a hard time understanding any inelastic good for that matter.

    I have no idea how this mess happened.

    I don’t even have an understanding of how messy the mess is.

    I have no idea how to clean it up.

    I don’t understand who/what BP is. Private company? Extension of the British government?

    For better or worse, I’m not tuning in to Rachel Maddow for her to tell me what to believe either.

    So being completely ignorant, what does the red blooded Rabbit do?

    Spout the fuck off like I know what I’m talking about that’s what!

    I don’t trust that moron Obama and his crew of inept dummies to make backroom deals outside the view of the public eye.

    Obama was rolling in BP money during his campaign. You want that guy being judge, jury and executioner when it comes to BP?

    It shocks me that the same dumb ass who claimed “rule of law” must prevail in the case of trying war criminals will abandon it so quickly when it’s his own neck on the line. Total hypocrisy.

    Whatever the case, if some bureaucratic slush fund is the kind of goods you think the President should be delivering right now, go light your fire works off.

    Meanwhile, the oil geyser continues to ejaculate all over the Gulf while a slithering President’s main concern is not getting any black gold on his face. And to think President Tight Ass promised us a “day or two” in his pathetic prime time speech. LOL.

    Yup. At a certain time, all leaders have to quit playing grand manipulator and actually lead.

    Sadly, Obama never does this.

    War in Afghanistan? Not until after the November elections.

    Gushing oil? Hide from it until it’s not possible anymore.

    Boooooooooo!

    For all we know, 20 Billion is a gift.

  28. El Tigre,

    Please see my link at #28 to determine the validity of Graychin’s comments. It’s worth a stroll down memory lane to validate the stupidity and bias of Graychin’s comment. Nothing further needs to be said that a long look through the pictures of 2001-2009.

    Worth repeating again:

    http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

    Graychin was blessed with an incredibly selective memory.

  29. Nice. Well, apparently it didn’t happen that way during G-chin’s long life.

    Yeah. The rise of the right sure is scary. Chris Matthews said so in his special. Those Tea Party racists. . .

  30. Holy shit Tex, maybe that thing with the exposed big titties and goatee was one of the Fathers Obama was talking about?

    Gross.

    They fact that the left scours Tea Party events, hoping to find one distasteful sign and then forgets almost every demonstration from the yesr 2000 to 2008 is amazing.

    I’ve accidently stumbled into these kind of events in Ann Arbor. They were all dressed like suisicde bombers.

    Oh well…..racist Uncle Eddie was at a Tea Party…..that trumps all.

  31. Hey Tex, while you were gone, Hippieprof said that Fox news will bring down all of Western Civilization!a

    ha ha….you can’t make this stuff up

  32. So, just out of curiosity, is it possible to have an intelligent conversation on this blog (and a lot of others) without claiming your opponent is a shill, drone, idiot, fuckhead, propagandist, or whatever other insult pops into your head?

    Don’t quote me on this, but I think most people who post here, on both sides, are pretty intelligent. Most of us have formed opinions after thinking through the issues – we are not simply parroting talking points.

    It does everyone a disservice when arguments are dismissed with a quick insult rather than being dealt with substantively.

    Yeah, I am guilty of it too sometimes. I still think we would be better off to keep the discussion at a higher level. But hey, I’, weird.

    — hp

  33. And another thing…..where are all those weirdos Tex linked to now?

    Same wars going on, the only difference is we have an environmental disaster becuase of off shore drilling.

    I would think this would be perfect time for these stinky fucks to show their hairy beavers off in a tree.

  34. ha ha….you can’t make this stuff up

    Apparently you can make it up – I never said they would bring down all of western civilization.

    I did say they were dangerous, and stand by that.

  35. Dude…you said Fox News is a danger to all of Western Civilization!!!!!!!!!…..now your thoughtful and reserved?

    The problem is, I do think you are a shill.

  36. ok…you said they are a “danger” to Western Civilization…

    Never mind how ignorant the comment is when put to the test of historical perspective, lets both agree Fox is slanted to the right.

    So, right wing views are a danger to the entirety of Western Civilization?

    And now you want to come here and stroke your beard, cross your legs in that established fashion that you and your buddies like to do, and act like you are a voice of reason?

  37. So Rahmbo has called on Tony Hayward to not try his hand at PR, lamenting his horrible efforts at it thus far with his recent yachting trip as case in point.

    Not to defend Hayward or his yacht, but Hayward was removed from the crisis and no longer has any role in it- so what he does makes no difference to the crisis. Obama on the other hand- according to him- has and continues to be involved in managing the crisis, so having your Chief of Staff go out and attack someone no longer involved while you go play golf is more than a little disingenuous.

    This is what Obama said he’d do:

    And I’m not going to rest or be satisfied until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil in the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of the Gulf are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.” Obama on May 14, 2010 – Washington, D.C.
    http://projects.washingtonpost.com/obama-speeches/speech/252/

    But out of the other side of his head, he is saying this:

    White House spokesman Bill Burton said on Monday that the President deserves some time off and he doesn’t think there’s ‘a person in this country that doesn’t think that their president ought to have a little time to clear his mind.’” 21 June 2010
    http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/whats-the-difference-between-golfing-and-yachting/question-1072647/

    According to reports, the weekend visit to the links was Obama’s 39th round of golf since taking office.

    Hmmmmmmmmm, is he really working that hard? Day 64…

  38. Hippie,

    If Fox News is dangerous, what are ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WaPO just for starters?

    Are they dangerous, or is just good journalism?

  39. DR, asfar as I know I have never said anything was a danger to all of Western Civilization. If you can find a place where I do say that, please do.

    I did say they are dangerous.

    The problem is, I do think you are a shill.

    Well, for what it is worth, I don’t think you are a shill. I think you are a thoughtful guy with some interesting things to share. You do have a bit of a quick temper, though it is nothing like Tex’s.

    So, apparently I think more of you than you think of me. I hope that makes you feel guilty.

    😉

  40. HP, in general I agree with you. However, I have very little tolerance for frauds, especially those that don’t actually engage in debate but rather throw strawmen into the fray to distract from the facts. I’ve little patience for that.

  41. If Fox News is dangerous, what are ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WaPO just for starters?

    For broadcast media, MSNBC is pretty far left – maybe as far as FOX. The rest – CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC? Pretty close to the center – with perhaps some slight biases.

    NYT and WaPO are left-leaning – but there are certainly right-leaning newspapers (Wall Street Journal comes to mind)

    What FOX does that I find insidious is express their bias in through their “straight” news stories. I don’t see the others doing that.

  42. So, apparently I think more of you than you think of me. I hope that makes you feel guilty.

    Guilt free.

    Now I was very nice in my question above without one reference to shill, drone, idiot, fuckhead, propagandist, or whatever other insult popped into my head.

    Aren’t you ashamed? 🙂

    What I think is humorous is how you derive my outbursts as fits of temper, anger, sadness. This board is almost my alter ego.

    Really, the only words that I can think of that would really aptly describe my “outbursts” are disgust, repulsion, and disdain, though not all of those descriptions would necessarily apply to you.

  43. If Fox News is dangerous, what are ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WaPO just for starters?

    Tex, can you really not detect a difference in the level of editorial bias shown in the allegedly straight news coverage at Fox News, vs. the other outlets that you mentioned? Or are you just being sarcastic?

  44. What? While I consider MSNBC to be complete crap, I’ll give them credit for their openness in their bias. CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc, all have quiet bias, pretending to be journalistic when they’re just as one sided as MSNBC. Look at their news pieces and tell me if you can really see any decernable differences in their reporting.

    I think Fox is center right, though not nearly as biased as the left claims. I think they get that rap because they’ve been one of the only media sources to actually challenge the administration. That use to be a quality in the news business, not so much any more…

  45. What FOX does that I find insidious is express their bias in through their “straight” news stories. I don’t see the others doing that.

    See, this is why I can’t really carry on a civil conversation with you Hippie.

    I know you’re not dumb, I’m not sure I think you’re a bald faced liar, but when you make such statements like this – a disingenuous magnitude of 10 on the Richter Scale, I certainly can not take you as anything but willingly blind or vicious propagandist.

    Straight news stories? Dan Rather and Mary Mapes…

    I’ve got at least twenty others off the top of my head equally egregious.

  46. “It is [Fox] absolutely unprecedented in a western democracy, and it is exceptionally dangerous. “-hippieprof

    The exact quote.

    hippieprof, I am capable of liking shills as human beings. I have always commended you on your respectful tone, and in that regard I can learn a lot from you.

    However, I do believe you have long lost your freedom of thought. You haven’t been a critical thinker in a long time. I’m sure the same thing would have happened to me if I was in your shoes. You work in an environment where critical thinking can ruin careers and lower grade point averages. Who would ever thought, the college campus, the great incubator of group think.

  47. Tex, can you really not detect a difference in the level of editorial bias shown in the allegedly straight news coverage at Fox News, vs. the other outlets that you mentioned? Or are you just being sarcastic?

    No, I certainly can not. In fact, I find FOX News far more fair and balanced than any of those I’ve listed.

    I’ll tell you what really drives this. You on the Left can’t handle dissent. You can not afford to have your distortions and lies challenged, because on a level playing field, you’re self-serving nature is exposed and you lose. It explains your outrage over the one channel that might lean right.

    It’s not the Conservatives or the Libertarians pushing for a Fairness Doctrine.

    Of all the lies marketed by the Left, I believe the most insidious is their contention of their wish for tolerance and freedom of speech. Poppycock.

  48. “Of all the lies marketed by the Left, I believe the most insidious is their contention of their wish for tolerance and freedom of speech. “-Tex

    Man, you got that right.

  49. I certainly can not take you as anything but willingly blind or vicious propagandist.

    OK – Tex – here is an example of what FOX does.

    Back in April Obama hosted a nuclear summit.

    The logo for the summit looked a bit lite a crescent moon, with this funny looking ball on it.

    FOX reported, as part of its regular news programming (i.e., not one of their opinion shows) that Obama was certainly paying homage to Islamic nations because the logo of the conference was designed to resemble the crescent featured on flags of many Islamic nations.

    Of course, as it turns out, the logo was a stylized depiction of en electron whirling around a Bohr atom – which – gosh gee – seems pretty appropriate for a nuclear conference.

    But – does FOX report this? No. Instead they leave a ridiculous insinuation hanging – hoping to reinforce the “Obama is a secret Muslim” theme they have been trying to build.

    No. I have NEVER seen such a blatent and fraudulent example of “journalism” in my life.

  50. I can handle dissent Tex. Why the hell do you think I keep jumping into these blog conversations?

    In fact, I much prefer good discussion of issues compared to the dittohead “Yeah – I agree” stuff you see on some blogs (both left and right).

  51. It’s not the Conservatives or the Libertarians pushing for a Fairness Doctrine.

    Tex, you understand that the fairness doctrine is about use of PUBLIC airwaves, right? It does not apply to cable, it does not apply to internet, in applies to broadcast media using PUBLIC airwaves.

    Given that airwaves are PUBLIC why should one viewpoint be the only one expressed?

  52. a link to the horror hippieprof describes

    Thanks for doing my job for me, DR.

    The clip you link to is far shorter than the one I saw previously – so apparently FOX made the allegations more than once.

    I will look to see if I can see the original clip I saw.

  53. “Thanks, Huck. I can see how that puts an entirely different spin on Rutherford’s facts.”

    Yes. It does. Because the latter was acquired without due process.

    If they were similar, the 9/11 fund would have been funded with al Qaeda/bin Laden assets, or the BP fund would be footed by taxpayers.

    ““Drill baby, drill” is an empty and mindless slogan chanted by mindless morons.”

    So mindless that Obama bought into it for a short time, and would be the policy of America today but not for this disaster.

  54. Jon Stewart is a smart lefty with an idiot audience. I give him kudos for his business intelligence, but personally he’s an asshole.

    Hippie, I saw the show. That’s okay, but I’m not blaming FOX. They are simply reporting the charges by loons.

    Any worse than this?

    http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-19823-Progressive-Examiner~y2009m8d20-MSNBC-lies-edits-out-black-gun-owner-says-white-people-showing-up-with-guns-threaten-Obama

    Let us remember there’s a little history of the Red Crescent being included in “memorials.” Anybody remember this one just a few years back and still under review?

    http://zombietime.com/flight_93_memorial_project/

    You guys from the Left ignore it, just like you like to ignore the 15 story mosque two blocks from Ground Zero (used as a symbol of lasting peace, of course).

  55. Hippie Prof,

    Tex, you understand that the fairness doctrine is about use of PUBLIC airwaves, right? It does not apply to cable, it does not apply to internet, in applies to broadcast media using PUBLIC airwaves.

    Like Air America? That you “progressives” can’t develop a winning strategy or capture an audience doesn’t preclude the right to free speech. Sorry…

    Given that airwaves are PUBLIC why should one viewpoint be the only one expressed?

    What’s stopping you from expressing your views. There’s all kinds of progressive activists with a voice over public airwaves. That they can’t draw an audience is none of my concern. Perhaps you should question why your viewpoint doesn’t sell over public airwaves instead of trying to silence the dissenting voices.

  56. What’s stopping you from expressing your views.

    Well, for one there is the Telecommunications Act which has allowed megacorporations to own multiple stations in the same marketplace – and then inundate that marketplace with programming that fits their political bias.

  57. BTW – I may have missed it – but nobody seems to be addressing Rutherford’s point that domestic drilling in no way making us energy independent – because the oil we drill here just goes on to the world market like any other oil.

    Indeed, how does “drill baby drill” make us energy independent. GOP candidates certainly campaigned on that basis. How does it work?

  58. Democrats have decided we don’t need a budget for 2011.

    Majority Leader Steny Hoyer made official Tuesday morning what most insiders have known for months: Congress won’t do a budget this year.

    Instead, Democrats are pushing an alternative route that falls well short of the more rigorous annual budget resolution — a short-term resolution that will call for discretionary spending lower than in President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget. But he said Congress wouldn’t take longer-term budget action before hearing from Obama’s fiscal commission in December. Republicans have lambasted Democrats for not passing a budget resolution, saying that’s the first time it’s happened since 1976.

    I checked my calendar and have noticed that December comes after November. Seems Democrats only want us to get bad news after an election.

  59. Well, for one there is the Telecommunications Act which has allowed megacorporations to own multiple stations in the same marketplace – and then inundate that marketplace with programming that fits their political bias.

    Like George Soros’ Air America? That reads like you can’t find an audience and people are being forced to turn the dial to Conservative stations. No sane and rational person believes that anymore than they believe Bill Clinton “felt their pain.”

    That excuse sounds analogous to Rush Limbaugh is too mean and Al Franken and Janeane Garofalo are incredibly talented.

    Find another excuse.

  60. “Indeed, how does “drill baby drill” make us energy independent. GOP candidates certainly campaigned on that basis. How does it work?”

    It’s called an “oil export ban.”

    As a reaction to oil prices and supply concerns, several bills have been introduced during 2000 which would ban the export of crude oil produced on Alaska’s North Slope. The export of the oil had been prohibited by the 1973 law facilitating the construction of the pipeline system now transporting oil to the ice-free, southern Alaska port of Valdez. Subsequently, concerns about adverse effects on energy security, supply and price were alleviated. In 1995, legislation was enacted permitting export. Relatively small amounts – never more than 7% – of Alaskan crude have been sold to Korea, Japan and China. Korea imports about half of this oil.

    One can certainly argue that an export ban is government infringment on the free market. On the other hand, there are bans against the export of other materials for various reasons. Mercury is 1 example.

  61. HP, I hadn’t looked into it. But I was wondering, why do the benefits of increased production disappear because there is global market for the commodity? Is it possible that or domestically harvested oil is free from the pricing constraints imposed by OPEC?

    Frankly, I am still trying to understand why the supposed brilliance found in Maddow’s observation eluded Obama and the left when he proposed domestic production.

  62. I may have missed it – but nobody seems to be addressing Rutherford’s point that domestic drilling in no way making us energy independent – because the oil we drill here just goes on to the world market like any other oil.

    You missed my comment then. Only a portion of the oil drilled in domestic waters goes on the open market. Companies have this thing called “contracts”. The supplier is indebted to provide a portion of the crude to the company’s refineries for process with priority given to the contractor. That’s why they are called fully integrated.

    Export of oil transported in the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System was banned until 1996. Between 1996 and 2004, a total of about 95.49 million barrels of crude oil, equal to 2.7% of Alaskan production during that period, was exported to foreign countries. As of September 2009, no Alaskan oil has been exported since 2004. – Source EIA

    If Rutherford’s statement were completely true, do you honestly think Venezuela would be selling once ounce of crude oil to America? Over half their crude is processed in Lake Charles, LA due to the high sulfur content – their crude is more like sludge and provides gasoline to over 14,000 distributors.

    Rachel Maddow is a talking parrot undoubtedly spends most her day finding some “expert” to support on her imagined views on her unwatched show, marketing what she wants us to believe. That’s why she’s now a failure and lost over half her audience since 2009.

    Like the dangers of Alaska drilling in the cold. 😆 She’s an idiot on par with that Yellow Dawg character.

  63. Actually, Hippie, I would like for you to explain Maddow’s hypothesis. Control over supply = independence. Pricing is not subject to the whims of a handful of countries that supply but don’t really consume. Isn’t greater supply preferable?

  64. “Is it possible that or domestically harvested oil is free from the pricing constraints imposed by OPEC?”

    It is my understanding that OPEC does not control prices outright, but controls production by its members. Controlling production effects supply and demand, which in turn effects prices.

    OPEC doesn’t control US production. So US oil in the open market would have a lowering effect on prices by increasing the supply.

    That same effect would be achieved with an export ban, as proven by practice.

  65. It is my understanding that OPEC does not control prices outright, but controls production by its members. Controlling production effects supply and demand, which in turn effects prices.

    OPEC doesn’t control US production. So US oil in the open market would have a lowering effect on prices by increasing the supply.

    That is correct Huck – simple economics in conjunction with national security. But I don’t expect the proponents of green energy to “get it.”

    That doesn’t fit with “their agenda” (of trying to free Obama’s tit in the ringer).

  66. “Well, for one there is the Telecommunications Act which has allowed megacorporations to own multiple stations in the same marketplace – and then inundate that marketplace with programming that fits their political bias.”

    That might stop your views from being heard, but it doesn’t stop you from expressing them.

  67. Huck, that was my point. Apparently we’ve all missed something. There has to be something more to Maddow’s theory. This too otherwise too rudimentary for intelligent discussion.

    Hippie? Rutherford? G-chin? Help a brother out here.

  68. What bothers me about this whole sordid Rutherford article is the amount of intellectual bankruptcy spent from MSNBC concerning how markets work.

    It’s like MSNBC believes whatever they publish, no matter how misguided and wrong, is fact.

    Several of us have already poked holes in their story about a big tank of oil that every one pours their findings into, and were just a bunch of schmoes out in virtual land.

    Does MSNBC really think most of America is this stupid.

    P.S. to Rutherford – Britain hasn’t been a Christian nation for 50 years. In fact, just 6.3 per cent of the population goes to church on an average Sunday. What you would call Christian, many in Britain would call social altruists. Secular with a fringe of sharia and a few remnants of a once Christian nation. Immigrants mostly make up what remains of the church.

  69. Another progressive theory bites the dust.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., recently blamed Bush appointees who “burrowed in” at the Minerals Management Service for the regulatory failures that led to the Deepwater Horizon disaster. But as it turns out, not one of the officials responsible for overseeing the exploded rig was a Bush political appointee.

    The Washington Examiner has obtained biographic information on the MMS officials responsible for overseeing BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig at the time it exploded, from the Gulf Region Director to the last inspector to set foot on the rig. Most of these federal employees started with the agency decades ago. Not one was a presidential appointment of George W. Bush, although one longtime MMS employee in question was promoted to his current position during the Bush Administration.

  70. Ask and ye shall receive…turn the volume up on this one.

    President Shankapotomus… 😆 Drives like he throws. I like the commentary (he sucks) 😆

  71. Hippie, you might need to check out Ford’s jump shot. He might have Obama beat.

    Any explanations for me?

  72. I read Rutherford’s chart a second time and all of sudden my blood started boiling.

    “America screwed over by dark-skinned fanatic Muslims.-R”

    Screwed over? Screwing someone over is not tipping 15%.

    3000 men, women and children were slaughtered that day.

    Young couples jumped out of the building holding hands.

    A man in his 30’s like me, his wife and baby at home, had to swan dive 70 stories.

    What the fuck is wrong with you?

    Screwed over.

    What a fucking idiot thing to say.

    God, you people and your politics. We’re talking about 3,000 people murdered by an unprovoked act of war.

    Screwed over.

    “Many of the victims fat cat wall street types.”-R

    Many of the victims composed of an entire fire house and hundreds of 20/30 somethings trying to make a go of it in Manhattan while living in Queens you dumb-dumb.

    To try to frame 9/11 as some kind of tragedy that impacted the upper class for the sake of keeping your love affair with the current administration juicy sicken me. 300 blue collar firemen ran INTO those buildings to their death.

    You want to defend Obama’s slush fund?

    Have at it.

    But do it without making 9/11 your little cartoon, dick head. Shit aint right.

  73. It would appear to me that Obama has been a fad, like the Hula Hoop or a Pet Rock.

    I predicted Obama to be like the golden calf, but this regime isn’t worthy of the gold inlay.

    Everyday that passes, this Administration looks more like a two season failed cartoon.

  74. I haven’t had time to read through today’s comments but I can’t wait to see Gorilla defend McChrystal’s insubordination. I’ll be back to comment more later (or write a post about it).

  75. Yeah. Look at #75 forward (the point of the post). Frankly, the more I consider Maddow’s observation, the more perplexed I am as to why it has any appeal.

    But if you have one for the jump shot, lay it on me!

  76. D.R.

    That video was haunting. It should be played for all of these sharia appeasing loons on this board every night before they sleep.

  77. Rutherford, this should really add fuel to your fire. Should give Graychin ammunition for months on end – I’m going to say it anyway.

    The more I have thought about this, I think the fix was in. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but let’s face the facts.

    Consider this about Obama:

    Opportunities abounded and doors flew open before he knocked on them, obstacles and opponents miraculously removed, resume builders thrown his way, no setbacks, no contretemps, all embarrassments and all records buried, all the while surrounded by hard-left activists, yet no high school, college, or law school friends or girlfriends have turned up? No accomplishments but two memoirs?

    Have you ever known a terrorist? Have you ever heard a 20-something being selected to hand out $100 million? Have you ever heard of a law review president who submitted no articles? Have you ever heard of someone getting a Nobel Peace Prize based on future results?

    Isn’t all this a little too coincidental? Throw in the serendipity of running against a weak opponent, and we get a malignant narcissist as Commander-in-Chief.

    I find all this rather disturbing myself. Almost supernatural…

  78. OK, back to #75 Tigre:

    HP, I hadn’t looked into it. But I was wondering, why do the benefits of increased production disappear because there is global market for the commodity?

    A couple of things. I had assumed (as had a lot of people) that domestic oil was only sold domestically – and thus would directly reduce our dependence on foreign oil – for every barrel we produced, that would be one less barrel we needed to buy on the world market.

    The fact that a lot of domestically produced oil flows right into that world market means we don’t see that gain in independence – we still have to buy the oil on the world market.

    Frankly, I am still trying to understand why the supposed brilliance found in Maddow’s observation eluded Obama and the left when he proposed domestic production. (and later) control over supply = independence.

    That would be true if we had as much oil as OPEC does. But, we don’t, so they will still be able to control prices. Because they control a lot more oil than we do they can merely cut their production to match what we put into the pool – and the market price stays the same.

    Frankly, I am still trying to understand why the supposed brilliance found in Maddow’s observation eluded Obama and the left when he proposed domestic production.

    Obama’s proposed domestic production was a trade off for votes on his climate bill – as it turns out it was a very ill-timed move. Why did the issue not arise then? Probably because a lot of people viewed the situation as I did and there was no good political reason to have them believe otherwise.

  79. Well HP, at least you took a stab at it.

    “[w]e still have to buy the oil on the world market.”

    What are the requirements that we do so? I suspect that we are free to purchase our own oil or not purchase from other nations if need be.

    “That would be true if we had as much oil as OPEC does. But, we don’t, so they will still be able to control prices.”

    No. We are just unwilling to tap it. That’s point.

    Enquiring minds want to know. To combat OPEC’s reduction in output we could offset by an increase in ours if we had the means.

  80. R, you’ll find that I didn’t defend McCrystal, though I don’t throw him under the bus either. I haven’t had time to resd the article yet, but from what I understand, the outrage right no is mostly from his aides, so who knows.

    The point I did bring up is why did this hapen? Why does Obama get no respect from the military, or those involved in defending this nation in general? A legitimate question I think.

    Read #5 before ou get too carried away…

  81. Tigre said: Enquiring minds want to know. To combat OPEC’s reduction in output we could offset by an increase in ours if we had the means.

    Well, we might be able to do that for a very short time. But, we simply don’t have the reserves to keep it up long. Saudi Arabia alone has over 10 times as much oil as we do. North America has 16 percent of the worlds reserves (mostly in Canada). The Middle East has 56 percent. Plus, as I understand it, our reserves are generally more costly to tap.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

    What are the requirements that we do so? I suspect that we are free to purchase our own oil or not purchase from other nations if need be.

    That is what I had thought too – but apparently it isn’t the case, at least the way contracts are now written. BP, for example, isn’t even a US company – so they have no requirement to sell to us unless specified by their contracts.

  82. McChrystal should have been canned yesterday. I can’t believe how bad he punked Obama!

    There is no way McChrystal didn’t do this on purpose. He must be really fed up with the President. I’m sure the “political” delay didn’t help things from the start.

    And Obama…my God man…..grow a pair of balls. Fire him already!

  83. A picture(s) – hundreds of them – is worth a thousand words.

    Regarding that great collection of pics posted by Tex, my only question is what’s with all the nudity?

    Hey who knows, maybe if conservative chicks protested naked all the time I might pay better attention …. maybe even attend a rally or two? 😉

  84. Does it bug anyone that Obama said in his speech that the thing would be plugged in two or three days?

    That was an outright lie.

    Doesn’t that bother you guys?

  85. Hippie, a 2 second Google pulled this back:

    http://www.kiplinger.com/businessresource/forecast/archive/The_U.S._Poised_to_hit_New_Oil_Gusher_080317.html

    So, Obama lied when he addressed the need for U.S. drilling? Great. He lies to the American public to get votes for cap and trade and that’s ok.?

    Clearly you’re trying like hell to rationalize. Why? This ain’t rocket science. Do you honestly think those that everyone in the oil industry knows last than Maddow?

    BP may be a foreign company. So what? How many US companies would like to tap our reserves?

    I need proof as to why we “as a nation” are required to purchase from our enemies. Contracts expire. We’re talking about the future. There’s an obvious logical fallacy in what you say (i.e. we have to do it today, so we must do it forever, therefore there’s no point).

    Since under your theory we always lose, there’s no point in US drilling, right? Ban all of it? If not, why not?

  86. Hayward was removed from the crisis

    Actually, I think this was mis-reported. Hayward is still involved in the crisis but his point man is now the American who will be the face to the cameras. Hayward is still on the case.

    By the way, both the lib side of the argument represented by HP and Graychin and the conservative side presented by Rabbit are correct. Golf and yachting might have been in the same category years ago but many middle class folks play golf nowadays while almost exclusively rich people go yachting.

    However, Rabbit is absolutely right that golf is not bowling. Golf still has the country club mystique about it even though there are now many public courses.

    I think the truth is that Hayward yachting and Obama golfing has nothing to do with getting the problem fixed. Does it look bad? Sure. We all love the illusion of these guys slaving over disaster plans night and day. But let’s get real, the folks who don’t get time off are the folks on the rig and in the boats doing the skimming and burning of oil, etc.

  87. Perhaps you should question why your viewpoint doesn’t sell over public airwaves instead of trying to silence the dissenting voices.

    I think the reason the viewpoint doesn’t sell is the lack of theatrics. What we need are more Ed Schulz on the radio. We need a liberal radio host yelling and screaming and being outrageous and saying that Lindsay Graham chops up little children and eats them for dinner.

    If we had a true liberal Rush, we’d get ratings. As I said before, I’d love to do that on The Rutherford Lawson Show (on a Blogtalkradio station near you) but I just don’t have the acting chops to say crazy stuff I don’t believe. You see, I’m not sure how much of what Rush says he really believes. He just knows what will fatten his bank account.

  88. tigre said: I need proof as to why we “as a nation” are required to purchase from our enemies. Contracts expire. We’re talking about the future.

    Actually, that information came from one of your own guys, earlier in the thread. Until this morning I had been assuming that we indeed had first crack at out own oil.

    If the article is correct that we are able to tap into a new gusher – great. I don’t quite see where the “decades” estimate comes from, though. If we were on our own and didn’t buy any foreign estimates are that we would be out of oil in about 8 years. Suppose the new reserve doubled that – it is hardly what I would call decades.

    I am not trying to spin anything – pretty much everybody knew Obama was playing politics when he came out in favor of new drilling. You can criticize him for playing politics if you like, but he is hardly the first – nor the last – to make such trades. It is how the game is played.

  89. Rabbit, please …. I just listened to the Doi 911 call you posted. Do you really think I don’t know what went down? Do you know how many times I cried during those days? Hell, just a few months before the attack my wife, father-in-law and I were at the top of the f*cking tower eating lunch. I was probably served by waiters who died that day.

    The point I was trying to make, however tasteless you might find it, is that there has to be an explanation for the 180 degree turnaround of folks who fully supported the 9/11 fund and suddenly have problems with the Gulf fund. And since I was in the mood to mess with conservatives last night (like a lib Rush) I threw in a bit of sociological motivation that might fuel the 180. I was being deliberately provocative and based on your reaction, it worked.

  90. It’s funny that when I contrast dark skinned Muslims with silver-spoon white guys, folks get offended but when Rush suggests kids should dumpster dive for their lunch this summer, none of you bats an eye.

    You see Tex … that’s why we need a liberal Rush. We need someone to really piss you off the way Rush pisses us off.

  91. Maybe Rush is just trying to share his vast worldly experience with the children. Those extra pounds he carries must come from somewhere – so maybe he is an accomplished dumpster diver himself. I mean – he wallows in garbage on his show – why not for his meals too?

  92. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but let’s face the facts.

    I think Gorilla posted a video on the last thread that fulfills all of Tex’s Obama conspiracy theories.

    Hate to break it to you but I actually have a friend from college who went to high school with Obama in Honolulu. So there is one witness to some truth in his biography.

  93. No. We are just unwilling to tap it. That’s point.

    Ehhhh, no.

    I really wanted to comment extensively tonight but it’s been a long work day and I’m burning the candle at both ends again. So I don’t have a source for this Tigre but all the oil that we could tap domestically is a drop in the bucket compared to what is produced elsewhere.

    Even if we exclusively used all of our own oil, it is a farce that it would fulfill our needs. Again …. we use 24% of current total world production. We are out of control and domestic drilling, even if it all went to us, which it doesn’t, wouldn’t get us under control.

  94. That was an outright lie.

    There is a difference between an outright lie and a dumbass statement, This was just another stanza in a lackluster speech. No doubt, he was quoting another empty promise by BP. I don’t know why he did it …. and when the gusher keeps gushing until late August, he will pay for it.

  95. I need proof as to why we “as a nation” are required to purchase from our enemies.

    Because we can’t make enough oil to sever the dependence. It is real simple.

    If it weren’t for the oil lobby we would have had electric cars years ago and everyone on this board knows it.

  96. Read #5 before you get too carried away…

    G, the problem, as you well know is not the substance of McChrystal’s and his staff’s remarks. The problem is that he said it in the first place. You work with your Commander-in-Chief privately to resolve issues. You don’t air your dirty laundry in public. Stanley has done this at least twice now. If you can’t get satisfaction privately, then you resign. But as long as you stay on board, you show public respect for your superior.

    What does Obama do now? My initial take was the same as Rabbit. Why the hell wasn’t he fired on the spot? But then isn’t this another no-win for Obama? He fires McChyrstal and he looks like he’s putting personal politics above what is best for the military mission. He keeps Stan on and he sends the message that he will tolerate insubordination. McChrystal has dealt Obama a terrible blow here.

    BTW, I originally liked Stan a lot because he seemed to believe that our strategy in Afghanistan had to be both military and humanitarian. However, the man apparently has a long history of having a big mouth. Truth is, the way he is reported to have handled the death of Pat Tillman should have disqualified him for his current post. Another in a long line of strange Obama appointments.

  97. You work with your Commander-in-Chief privately to resolve issues. You don’t air your dirty laundry in public. Stanley has done this at least twice now.” – R

    What did he say the first time? Let’s review:

    In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.

    He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”.

    When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.”

    He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6259582/White-House-angry-at-General-Stanley-McChrystal-speech-on-Afghanistan.html

    He was asked, and answered, a question about whether or not he would support a strategy that centers on drone strikes. He said no. I don’t imagine that you, or many other folks on this blog, understand strategic theory- military or otherwise. But to think that you could address insurgent issues with drone strikes smarts of Operation Linebacker and a McNamara approach to conflict. I think we all remember how that went. So tell me, what was insubordinate in that remark?

    The short answer is nothing, but considering the thin skin Obama has, he took offense at what was nothing more than an opinion on strategy. Since the proposed strategy belonged to the idiot Biden, which constitutes the bulk of Obama’s foreign policy knowledge and experience, we’re not surprised.

    What did he say about Obama in the Rolling stone article? That Obama looked intimidated in the Tank around all of those Generals. Frankly, if Obama claimed that he wasn’t intimidated, I call him a bald face liar and the epitome of arrogance (oh, I’ve already done that haven’t I…). Generals don’t come about from Harpo productions and on the wave of uncriticizing media attention. It takes over 20 years of highly competitive work just to get to the Colonel level, and flag officer sponsorship beyond that. The point is, no surprise and no doubt that he was correct in that assessment.

    What else did he say? That when he met Obama, that O didn’t know anything about him and that pretty much most of the 10 minutes he had with O was for photos. Surprised? I’m not.

    The rest of the disparaging comments seem to come from his aides rather than from him, so who knows what that means.

    But tell me this, and you and the left are avoiding these questions like the plague- why would he and his aides have this attitude of the Administration and that what should that tell us?

    I think what we get most clearly from all of this is that Obama appears to be uninterested in Afghanistan and is certainly not providing the level of support and backing that McCrystal would expect from the WH. Don’t forget, he’s got precedence on what to expect from a wartime President- George W. Bush. Like him or not, he was regularly (weekly if not daily) in contact with ALL of his major commanders in theater and McCrystal, as the Special Forces commander in Iraq hunting al-Qaida, was one of them. He saw Odierno and Petreaus speak to Bush daily, so he certainly had expectations of what kind of support the WH would provide. Case in point:

    General McChrystal has not spoken with Mr. Obama since submitting his grim assessment of the war a month ago and has spoken with him only once in the 100 days since he took command of all American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/world/asia/30policy.html

    So tell me R, McCrystal’s ‘insubordination’ aside, what does this say about the entire situation as a whole?

  98. The point I was trying to make, however tasteless you might find it, is that there has to be an explanation for the 180 degree turnaround of folks who fully supported the 9/11 fund and suddenly have problems with the Gulf fund.” – R

    What I don’t understand, is how you’re equating the two. The only similarity they have is that it is money for victims, however, one was legally gotten whereas the other is dubious at best and illegal at worst.

    What don’t you understand in differentiating between public and private funds and the REQUIREMENT of due process for private funds?

    Listen, it is intellectually dishonest to throw the red herring of ‘oh, conservatives support BP since they don’t support the escrow fund’. I, and many others, have little to no sympathy for BP, but I do have respect for the rule of law and it concerns me greatly to see the WH Chief of Staff brag about how the Administration FORCED BP to fund the escrow fund with $20 billion dollars and to FORCE BP to not fund dividends- a source of income for thousands of pensioners in Britain AS WELL AS the U.S.

    The second major concern we have is the so called independence of the administrator of the fund. Regardless of the resume of Ken Fienberg, he is a senior advisor for Obama and he is the guy who is suppose to be regulating executive CEO pay, something we’ve issue with to begin with. Look at the comments of Fienberg immediately following the announcement of the fund: Obama has ordered me to do this and to do that. Independent?

    And frankly, we have precedence to be skeptical of this administration when it comes to any subjective distribution of funds. How about Obama ignoring a centuries worth of bankruptcy law to give some 55% of GM shares to the Union or the billions of the ‘Stimulus’ that were used to fund state deficits, which have been severely hampered by Rolls Royce pension plans for Unions.

    This Administration has defined itself as the political advocate of the unions, reciprocating policies bought and paid for by the SEIU, AFL-CIO, UAW, etc, etc, etc.

    Why don’t you think the Jones Act have been waiver until thus far?

    We don’t trust the Administration because it hasn’t earned any trust and this BP escrow fund issue stinks of thuggary.

    Why can’t we use the law instead of trampling it?

  99. From Rolling Stone http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236#

    Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama looked “uncomfortable and intimidated” by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn’t go much better. “It was a 10-minute photo op,” says an adviser to McChrystal. “Obama clearly didn’t know anything about him, who he was. Here’s the guy who’s going to run his fucking war, but he didn’t seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed.

  100. R – let me know when you find your sources. I can’t, but I’m a little too lazy to dig deep.

    And “If it weren’t for the oil lobby we would have had electric cars years ago and everyone on this board knows it.”

    Bull-effing-sheet.

  101. If it weren’t for the oil lobby we would have had electric cars years ago and everyone on this board knows it.

    If they could have made electric cars reliable, dependable, and affordable, everybody would have owned one when gas went to almost $5.00 a gallon, irrespective of what the “oil lobby” did.

    This is the part of Rutherford I don’t like. But it certainly proves why he’s in love with Butch Madcow – this is the same shit she mouths on her useless show. Make statements that are outright lies, some of them outrageous lies, have an uninformed and unsophisticated audience like Butch does, and let them run with it all day – force the other side to prove you wrong. It gets tedious.

    As I hope I demonstrated yesterday, Rutherford’s a nice writer, great voice for the left’s lies, and an effective Obama enabler.

    But when it comes to the real world, he’s just dumber than shit and helpless. He should have been a professor – they’re the same way and that is who Rutherford reminds me.

  102. Make statements that are outright lies, some of them outrageous lies, have an uninformed and unsophisticated audience like Butch does, and let them run with it all day – force the other side to prove you wrong. It gets tedious. — Tex

    This sounds like Chin…

  103. Rutherford,

    I’m confused.

    Who and what is Rush?

    Titillating provocateur you seek to emulate?

    Ignorant blowhard you seek to ignore?

    Dangerous mouthpiece that needs to be nullified by hippieprof and his Nanny?

    So, you cheapened 9/11 to be provocative? You admit your dumb ass analogy was…well….dumb assed? The problem is that chart was the crux of your argument.

    Let me tell you about Rush. I find him at his worst when he simply tries to be provocative. He’s at his best when talks the truth, a truth that is often times stifled in hippieprof’s classroom and ignored in the MSM.

    If your grasp of 9/11 was anything other then academic, you wouldn’t have forced that idiot puzzle piece. Not when 300 fire fighters died going in. Not when a 100 Muslims died.

    **************************************************************************
    This is totally irrelevant, but I was in the WTC on September 9th. I helped my buddy move there, only to return on October 11th to help him move his shit out of his condemned building. I hear what your saying about those waiters. I was probably in the same bar you were, way at the top.

  104. Rutherford, it doesn’t look “everyone on this board” agrees. Anyway, your comment lends nothing to the debate. We were talking about your adoption of Maddow’s illogical assertion.

    Since G-chin nor Hippie will answer, let’s see if you will to run your assertion to its logial conclusion. If there’s no benefit to domestic drilling, explain why we shouldn’t immediately ban it entirely?

  105. By the way, Tuscon cops have now been given death warrants my Mexican drug lords. The war, literally, has crossed the border. We’re talking about people who will cut your face off , staple it on a soccer ball and kick into the town square.

    Pat yourself on the back cheap labor conservatives and feel good liberals.

    BUILD A FUCKING WALL AND MILITARIZE THE BORDER. LEGALIZE MARIJUANA. PROBLEM SOLVED

    Disgusting.

  106. World Cup Soccer is tailor made for a stay home Dad. My dad always told me the game was for “communists and queers”. But, he’s wrong. it’s sweet. (He’s been watching it himself.)

    Americans just got screwed out of ANOTHER goal.

  107. Supply of oil on the world market obviously helps lower prices. That being said, oil is weird a product. it’s not always directly related to supply, as we saw two summers ago. Plus, it’s not always about demand either. There is certainly some complexities involved that are hard for me to grasp. Speculators, cartels, elasticity. Weird shit, black gold.

  108. a truth that is often times stifled in hippieprof’s classroom and ignored in the MSM.

    Damn, Rabbit, I knew you seemed familiar. When was it you took classes from me?

  109. Since G-chin nor Hippie will answer, let’s see if you will to run your assertion to its logial conclusion. If there’s no benefit to domestic drilling, explain why we shouldn’t immediately ban it entirely?

    Tigre – I have been answering – but you don’t like my answers.

    I never said that domestic drilling had no benefits. I did say that it isn’t the magic cure you think it is.

    I am repeating myself – but the bottom line is that we don’t have large enough reserves to make much of a dent. If we ramp up our drilling capacity we will just run out of oil faster – and then OPEC will really have a corner on the market.

  110. Rabbit, you might have seen it, but your comment reminded me of this Onion piece:

    Plus, you’re right. Oil is a weird commodity with a weird market that clearly no one aorund here knows anything about. But I do know that Maddow and Ruhterford are talking out of their asses.

  111. If they could have made electric cars reliable, dependable, and affordable, everybody would have owned one when gas went to almost $5.00 a gallon, irrespective of what the “oil lobby” did.

    And indeed, I see a lot more hybrids in parking lots these days, don’t you?

    The oil lobby hasn’t been able to stop development of electric cars – but they have certainly managed to slow it down. We would indeed be driving electric cars right now if R&D for electric received subsidies the way the oil industry does.

  112. Perhaps we spent our subsidy wad on Al Gore’s corn syrup gas. That was sure thought out by your government heroes. Shit gets crappy mileage AND probably starved a million to death overseas.

  113. Also…I’m shocked someone so aghast by the oil lobby would have voted for Obama, considering the wheel barrels of BP cash he took in.

  114. Hippie, the reason you keep repeating yourself is because I am attacking the logic of MAddow’s premise — not yours. Sheesh. Where I did say that domestic drilling is the magic cure “[I] think it is.” Damn. Some critical analysis of your argument please (well, actually Rutherford’s, but he generally won’t respond to me).

    And if you’re going to say that we can;t produce enough to have an effect, for the love of God back it up with something. Using your own number, we use 25% of the world’s oil and have the capacity to tap 16%. While I am confident your numbers are based on speculation, even if true that doesn’t support what you are saying.

    You, G-0chin and Rutherford can concede that you don’t know what the hell your talking about you know. Rabbit did earlier. So did I. It can be cathartic sometimes when you”re surrounded by know it alls.

  115. Also…I’m shocked someone so aghast by the oil lobby would have voted for Obama, considering the wheel barrels of BP cash he took in.

    So – you ever wonder why BP gave Obama that money?

    Perhaps because his stances have generally been anti-oil and they were trying to influence him to change his opinions? Getting money doesn’t mean you support someone’s opinion – it can mean the opposite – that an effort is being made to change an opinion.

  116. The Tiger,

    That Onion vid cracked me up.

    I double taking those same numbers you just talked about. They were giving me a half tilted head like a confused dog. I was just about to say what you did. Hippieprof clearly didn’t understand his own stats. 16% of the world oil supply when he use 25% is, in fact, a lot of fucking oil!

  117. To be more specific, look at the table near the bottom of the article where it lists (among other things) “Reserve Life.” Reserve Life is the ration of the size of reserves to the production of those reserves. It is how many years reserves will last at current rates of production.

    For the US, it is 8 years.

    For Saudi Arabia, it is 72 years

  118. 16% of the world oil supply when he use 25% is, in fact, a lot of fucking oil!

    Rabbit, apparently you misread what I said. The 16 percent is in North America – and most of that is in Canada. They are indeed a sovereign nation and unless we plan on invading we don’t get to count their oil as ours. Yes – they are generally a friendly nation – but they are not obliged to sell their oil to us.

  119. It doesn’t really get into how oil prices are set, but if anyone is interested in an in depth history of oil, watch the 8-part documentary “The Prize.” It gives a fascinating look at the history of this resource. I recommend watching all episodes in their entirety. It’s worth it.

    (You’ll probably have to watch it on Google videos. It’s definately not something you’ll find at the local video store)

  120. And the whole oil independence thing is keeping our cash out of the hands of Venezuelan Mussolini wannabes and stink beard Muhammadan radicals.

    I have no problems with enriching my brothers to the north.

  121. “So – you ever wonder why BP gave Obama that money?”

    Gee. Why would a company called “Beyond Petroleum” give shitloads of money to a guy pushing for energy alternatives to petroleum? I wonder….

  122. I have no problems with enriching my brothers to the north.

    I don’t either – but I also suspect that Canadian oil doesn’t flow directly to us – it goes into the world market just the same as ours does.

  123. That makes no sense, man. EVERYTHING is dictated by the world market.

    Dude…..do you think there is a single thing you can buy NOT dictated by the world market?

    You spend too much time at those Renaissance Festivals. I know it’s an excuse for you to break out your puffy shirt but damn, man. Get a clue.

  124. And indeed, I see a lot more hybrids in parking lots these days, don’t you?

    Nope, not really. In fact, sales dropped in 2009.

    http://forcechange.com/2009/03/17/hybrid-sales-fall-precipitously-as-gas-prices-remain-low/

    People are discovering for the additional $10K you pay for a hybrid, the cost simply isn’t worth the offset of a few more MPG. Diesel has actually proven to be a far more effective and economical technology when considering price and the lithium and cadmium battery mess.

    The oil lobby hasn’t been able to stop development of electric cars – but they have certainly managed to slow it down.

    Prove it. I say you’re lying through your teeth.

    We would indeed be driving electric cars right now if R&D for electric received subsidies the way the oil industry does.

    Prove it – again boastful claims you can’t begin to prove and lies that the mouths like you from the Left have propagated without challenge. The feasibility of electric cars has been in the work for 40 years, and they’re still light years from perfecting the mass marketing. GM alone has received billions in subsidies to make an electric car and hasn’t been able to perfect the technology and still be affordable.

    http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/01/buyers-unlikely-to-recoup-extra-cost-of.html

    Hippie the reason I don’t much care for you is that your the male version of Butch Madcow in my book. You may be likable, but your a very dishonest propagandist. A wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  125. Hippie, reread your wikipedia. You are only focusing on “proved reserves.” Obviously, exploration is limited or probably nion-existent in areas we are not permitted to tap.

    Again. At least you’re trying.

  126. Stories abound, Tex – there is even a documentary film on the subject. Since you automatically reject anything I say as propaganda, I don’t know why I bother.

    Here is one story:

    http://www.emagazine.com/view/?411&printview

    I guess I just see a lot more hybrids in the university parking lot, because people here actually care about the world and are willing to spend a bit more to do something for the general good – but I know exactly how you will scoff at that.

    That is the point, isn’t it? If it just comes down to the final sticker price, of course hybrids and electric cars will fail. What it requires is a recognition that energy independence will cost a bit more in the short term, but will be a worthwhile investment for the future.

  127. A bit more? You didn’t bother to read my article, did you? Twenty years of price differential pertaining to purchase price vs. fuel cost is not a bit more. After you’ve taxed us to death, you still don’t get it.

    I don’t know why you bother either, because I’m going to call you on your propaganda. Here’s your author – another green propagandist. I want some hard numbers pal – not some ecological terrorists opinion from the “Green Blog” of the New York Slimes.

    http://www.jimmotavalli.com/

    Now you tell me why the automotive industry, who could care less about the sale of gasoline, would have the ability for a reliable electric car that has been subsidized with billions and could sell millions of vehicles, wouldn’t have it to market by now?

    You blame big oil looking to demonize to further your stupid agendas in your feckless global warming scams, but the real fact of the matter is the practicality and technology of electric vehicles isn’t there – not even close.

  128. “this is the most intense soccer game i have ever seen”

    I agree, even though its only the 2nd game I have ever watched..LOL. (The first was the first US game in this World Cup)

  129. More oil into the market is good for the price.The same could be said if we actually improved the Grid and allowed people to connect and disconnect from it as needed secondary to independent wind,solar,hyrdro etc uses.

    Has anyone (Huck esp.) seen much on the Honda Clarity? I’ve seen one thing and I’m enamored. I’d take one of those over a plug in Volt or SMART car methinks.

    Rutherford.
    I’ve waited some time topost this as not to have it be off the cuff,out of my gut. This post is a disgrace. I’d echo DR’s earlier and that you tried to refute it as you did speaks volumes that you knew better when you typed it and set up the visual aid.

  130. Perhaps our propagandists can justify the reasons?

    “The primary responsibility of Congress under the Constitution is to pass a budget for the federal government. The Democrats have a 77-seat majority in the House and an 18-seat majority in the Senate, where filibusters won’t apply anyway on budgetary matters. Barack Obama’s presidency gives them a clear path to passing whatever budget Democrats desire for FY2011. And so, obviously, all of this has proven too much of a hurdle for Democrats to overcome, as Steny Hoyer admitted today.”

    Gutless and pathetic. And Hippie wonders why I call his beloved party useless? There isn’t but a hand full of Democrats in Congress that serve any purpose but further damaging our country.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38843.html

  131. from the politico link above.

    “Let me make it very clear. In the short term we can not stimulate and depress at the same time,”

    -Stoyer
    I don’t know about that. Every time the Dems try to “stimulate” something I get a little more depressed.

  132. “Has anyone (Huck esp.) seen much on the Honda Clarity?”

    Never heard of it.

    On a related note, a referendum to not enforce a 2007 greenhouse-gas-emissions law in CA will be on the Nov. ballot. It was put forth by the oil and manufacturing industry and will be opposed by environmental groups and much of the state government. Supporters contend that the current law is killing jobs, and that there aren’t enough green jobs being created to make up for the loss. They seek to put off enforcement of the 2007 law until state unemployment levels drop to 5.5%.

    The outcome could have interesting effects nationally. I can’t make any predictions yet.

  133. Alfie,

    I don’t know about that. Every time the Dems try to “stimulate” something I get a little more depressed.

    You’ve got good company. Me, 200,000,000 other Americans, our military, and the economy for starters.

    That’s such an outrage, every Democratic Congressman should have his or her salary rescinded for the entire year.

  134. Tex, that budget thing pisses me off, too. It is so obvious. They don’t want to pass a budget before the election because they will be screwed. They know their budget will force tax increases and they want to wait to do both. They are already hinting that the Bush tax cuts will expire for the middle class, too. Then they will try and tell everyone it isn’t an increase, they are just not renewing the decrease.

  135. I knew the malignant narcissist couldn’t stand to be insulted. Excellent.

    I wonder if McCrystal will make the mistake of pulling the handle for Dims again? 🙂

    And to think – Obama’s hand picked man too. 😆

  136. You got it Huck. You nailed exactly why these goons won’t pass a budget and what they will call the Bush tax cuts that expire. Gawd, I hope America is starting to catch on to these thieves.

    I mean, what more can these goons do to show their hand?

  137. 🙂 …McCrystal should run for office like General McClellan did.

    Actually, I shouldn’t be laughing. President Joke can’t get along with his Commanders right before a major offensive.

    He did need to be canned though.

    You think we will see another General Betray Us add? I’m guessing no, since the Copperheads seemed to have grown bored of the war.

  138. Budgets? They won’t even change a military strategy until after an election. Dead soldiers be damned!

    That one was one of the most sickening things I’ve ever seen a President do.

    Oh…I forgot…he was being cerebral. The great thinker. Kind of like the oil leak.

  139. I missed the goal. Can you believe that?

    Little man woke up crying. He completely blew his diapers up with about a quarter pound of yellow, toxic, stink.

  140. I defend Obama on a temporary moratorium on off shore drilling. I can’t believe there has been no foresight for a leak like this. They seem to have no contingency plan what so ever. Sure, a leak like this is unprecedented. But it only takes one for massive damage. Drudge is reporting that it might be raining oil in Louisiana, now. (Only read the headline)

    We need to learn how to stop these things before we go on. I think that’s common sense.

  141. You know what is real hypocrisy? And you’ll never hear a word about this from any of our resident propagandists here.

    It is Pres. Duck hook calling up Petraeus to now lead in Afghanistan. Obama, Biden, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi three years ago were taking pot shots at this man on the hill, in essence calling him a liar about the “surge” working in Iraq. It is all on record for anybody to hear. On top of that, Petraeus is rumored to be a possible Republican candidate for President.

    Now these same useful idiots are so desperate for a fix to hides Obama’s clear incompetence, they are asking the same honorable man they lambasted as liar three years ago to bail their asses out, and hoping we’ve all forgot about their idiocy.

    They make me puke.

    Damn, I wish Petraeus would have said, “Go f yourselves.”

  142. Tex said: Damn, I wish Petraeus would have said, “Go f yourselves.”

    Some patriot you are, Tex. You know very well that a good soldier does not do that with his commander in chief. Or maybe you don’t know that.

  143. And a good public servant doesn’t grand stand for partisan points at the expense of a good soldier, hippieprof.

  144. hippieprof, you seriously can’t see the irony that disgusts tex so much?

    Oh, I see the irony. I also think that being disgusted at Obama is a knee-jerk reaction for Tex.

    I have said it before – you guys never cut the guy the slightest bit of slack. You never credit him with doing anything right. Guess what. Nobody is that big of a jerk. You should be able to say something decent about the guy. This reflexive “disgust” really gets old. It frankly suggests a lack of critical thinking.

    Obama’s hands were tied here – what else was he supposed to do? You would be criticizing him as a weakling had McChrystal been allowed to stay.

  145. Hippie, I posted this at Alfie’s blog, but it bears repeating here. I could substitute Hippie, Graychin, or Rutherford in place of the incomparably stupid Dawg and it would still fit. Though I don’t believe any of the three of you a complete moron like the Dawg, I do think each of you in your unique way are completely deranged, deluded, and to various degrees sick in the mind. Here’s the post, just in case you don’t see it.

    —————————-

    Anyone ever heard of Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D.? He wrote a book, complete with analytical study a few years back that determined that modern day liberalism is actually a mental disorder. I think men like Yellow Poodle are case studies (and no, I am not kidding). Here’s an excerpt from Dr. Rossiter’s excellent work:

    On the Madness of Modern Liberalism:
    The egalitarianism and welfarism of modern liberal government are incompatible with the facts of human nature and the human condition. But the rise to power of the liberal agenda has resulted from the fact that the people of western societies have irrationally demanded that governments take care of them and manage their lives instead of protecting their property rights. This misconception results in massive violations of those rights while permitting government officials to act out their own and their constituents’ psychopathology. The liberal agenda gratifies various types of pathological dependency; augments primitive feelings of envy and inferiority; reinforces paranoid perceptions of victimization; implements manic delusions of grandeur; exploits government authority for power, domination and revenge; and satisfies infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation.

    Modern liberalism rejects, to one degree or another, the competence and sovereignty of the common man and subordinates him to the will of governments run by liberal elites. The western world’s twentieth century capitulation to this philosophy is obvious–and the implications for liberty are ominous. But the history of the world also documents the heroic struggles of human beings to escape from tyrannies of all types, whether imposed by the brute force and declared entitlement of a dictator, or falsely justified by economic, religious or political sophistries. The science fiction of Marxian economic evolution, the grandiose fantasy of a New World Order, the utopian dreams of The Great Society, the myth of the divine emperor, have all had their turns on center stage in irrational man’s attempts to legitimize government control and deny individual liberty. The realities of the human condition, especially the inherent sovereignty of individuals and their inevitable differences in choice and preference, render all collectivist doctrines absurd. A rational biologist will not transport a mountain goat to a prairie and declare a match between organism and environment. A rational social policy theorist will not create an environment of rules for human action that dismisses individual differences, ignores the critical roles of free choice, morality and cooperation, and otherwise distorts and violates the nature of man, and then announce that utopia has arrived in a workers’ paradise.

    Like all other human beings, the modern liberal reveals his true character, including his madness, in what he values and devalues, in what he articulates with passion. Of special interest, however, are the many values about which the modern liberal mind is not passionate: his agenda does not insist that the individual is the ultimate economic, social and political unit; it does not idealize individual liberty and the structure of law and order essential to it; it does not defend the basic rights of property and contract; it does not aspire to ideals of authentic autonomy and mutuality; it does not preach an ethic of self-reliance and self-determination; it does not praise courage, forbearance or resilience; it does not celebrate the ethics of consent or the blessings of voluntary cooperation. It does not advocate moral rectitude or understand the critical role of morality in human relating. The liberal agenda does not comprehend an identity of competence, appreciate its importance, or analyze the developmental conditions and social institutions that promote its achievement. The liberal agenda does not understand or recognize personal sovereignty or impose strict limits on coercion by the state. It does not celebrate the genuine altruism of private charity. It does not learn history’s lessons on the evils of collectivism.

    What the liberal mind is passionate about is a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, alienation and injustice. Those who occupy this world are “workers,” “minorities,” “the little guy,” “women,” and the “unemployed.” They are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, disenfranchised, exploited and victimized. They bear no responsibility for their problems. None of their agonies are attributable to faults or failings of their own: not to poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration tolerance, mental illness or defects in character. None of the victims’ plight is caused by failure to plan for the future or learn from experience. Instead, the “root causes” of all this pain lie in faulty social conditions: poverty, disease, war, ignorance, unemployment, racial prejudice, ethnic and gender discrimination, modern technology, capitalism, globalization and imperialism. In the radical liberal mind, this suffering is inflicted on the innocent by various predators and persecutors: “Big Business,” “Big Corporations,” “greedy capitalists,” U.S. Imperialists,” “the oppressors,” “the rich,” “the wealthy,” “the powerful” and “the selfish.”

    The liberal cure for this endless malaise is a very large authoritarian government that regulates and manages society through a cradle to grave agenda of redistributive caretaking. It is a government everywhere doing everything for everyone. The liberal motto is “In Government We Trust.” To rescue the people from their troubled lives, the agenda recommends denial of personal responsibility, encourages self-pity and other-pity, fosters government dependency, promotes sexual indulgence, rationalizes violence, excuses financial obligation, justifies theft, ignores rudeness, prescribes complaining and blaming, denigrates marriage and the family, legalizes all abortion, defies religious and social tradition, declares inequality unjust, and rebels against the duties of citizenship. Through multiple entitlements to unearned goods, services and social status, the liberal politician promises to ensure everyone’s material welfare, provide for everyone’s healthcare, protect everyone’s self-esteem, correct everyone’s social and political disadvantage, educate every citizen, and eliminate all class distinctions. With liberal intellectuals sharing the glory, the liberal politician is the hero in this melodrama. He takes credit for providing his constituents with whatever they want or need even though he has not produced by his own effort any of the goods, services or status transferred to them but has instead taken them from others by force.

    Radical liberalism thus assaults the foundations of civilized freedom, and for that reason it is a genuine evil. Further, given its irrational goals, coercive methods and historical failures, and given its perverse effects on human development, there can be no question of the radical agenda’s madness. Only an irrational agenda would advocate a systematic destruction of the foundations on which ordered liberty depends.

  146. It frankly suggests a lack of critical thinking.

    Funny, because I think the exactly same thing of you. Absolutely no critical thinking at how you derive your conclusions. I can tell you what you will conclude by simply gauging what is the popular opinion in academia before I ever read a response from you. In fact, of hand I can’t think of one thing you oppose that isn’t the majority opinion in your circles. It’s as predictable as the sun rising.

    If my critical thinking skills so shallow, then justify the David Patraeus decision for me? Seems to me what you are calling “knee-jerk”, is in fact an immutable demonstration of you not being able to say, “Obama was wrong, I was wrong, or liberals got in wrong.” You clearly were three years ago, and you’re still wrong now.

    Obama’s hands were tied here – what else was he supposed to do? You would be criticizing him as a weakling had McChrystal been allowed to stay.

    Actually, I would not have had Obama chosen to allow McChrystal to stay, which would have demonstrated real leadership. What Obama now has aptly demonstrated is his thin-skinned, dare I say it knee-jerk reaction to anything he perceives as threatening.

    Real leadership would have put personal differences aside and called his hand picked general into his office to discuss the shortcomings of the strategy.

    Obama has again deferred to a position of weakness, which is exactly what I would have predicted from a malignant narcissist like Obama. 😉

  147. Boy that was poor grammar…get rid of an the, Off-hand, not of hand. And that was only the 1st paragraph. 😳

  148. In fact, of hand I can’t think of one thing you oppose that isn’t the majority opinion in your circles. It’s as predictable as the sun rising.

    Shows you know very little about me, Tex.

    Lets see…

    I think PETA is a terrorist organization.

    I think that there should be some limits on abortion.

    I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I support our continued presence there.

    I supported the invasion of Iraq until it became clear that it was done on false pretenses.

    Over my lifetime I have voted for my Republicans for president than I have Democrats.

    I am in favor of safe nuclear power.

    That is just a few off the top of my head.

    OK – you go now. List a few liberal views you might hold.

    Until you do that, don’t dare call me a propagandist.

  149. “you guys never cut the guy the slightest bit of slack. You never credit him with doing anything right.”

    You’re the one who suspiciously and coincidentally happens to tow university party line on pretty much everything.

    Can you say the same about me?

    I might not have the world figured out, but I call it like I see it. Your charge against me is total bull shit.

    You think I lash out at Obama just to do it?

    The dude deserves my scorn. He deserves the scorn from you too if you really believe the very platform you daily barf out on these blogs.

    Nah…you’re the team player, not the Rabbit.

  150. And look whose ass Patraeus will be asked to save?

    Anybody remember this jewel? Let us now hold these assholes accountable. I’m sure you’ll be joining me Hippie in their condemnation. Right?

  151. “I think PETA is a terrorist organization.”-hippieprof

    PETA? lol. They don’t even want people to have a family dog. Don’t throw the dog the limb you just went out on, you might kill him.

    “I think that there should be some limits on abortion”.

    Wow…..you’re against blatant infanticide

    “I supported the invasion of Afghanistan. I support our continued presence there.”

    Oh yeah? Why? You never write about it.

    “I supported the invasion of Iraq until it became clear that it was done on false pretenses.”

    Pretenses? As in lies?

    “Over my lifetime I have voted for many Republicans for president than I have Democrats.”

    Which ones?

    ***********I am in favor of safe nuclear power.*************

    Ding! Ding! Ding! Me too! Real common ground! Finally, some sanity.

  152. Liberal views? Is that with a capital “L”, of which I consider myself one, or a small “l”, which I consider you one.

    Your memory must be bad. Let’s see. Conservation ring a bell? You just complimented me on it not two weeks ago before I wrote off your blog forever.

    And I’m calling you a rank propagandist, including your response to me, which I will happily pick apart if you would like me to.

    Why don’t you list the Republican Presidents you’ve voted for to satisfy my curiosity first?

  153. It is one of ironies of our present warped climate that Petraeus will face far less criticism from the media and politicians than during 2007–8 (there will be no more “General Betray Us” ads or “suspension of disbelief” ridicule), because his success this time will reflect well on Obama rather than George Bush. It is a further irony that Obama is surging with Petraeus despite not long ago declaring that such a strategy and such a commander were failures in Iraq. And it is an even further irony that he is now rightly calling for “common purpose” when — again not long ago, at a critical juncture in Iraq — Obama himself, for partisan purposes on the campaign trail, had no interest in the common purpose of military success in Iraq. – Victor David Hanson

    Amen Dr. Now, when will Keith Olbermann be offering up his mea culpa of General Betray Us?

  154. HippieProf: ” have said it before – you guys never cut the guy the slightest bit of slack. You never credit him with doing anything right. ”

    DR: “I defend Obama on a temporary moratorium on off shore drilling.”

    And I agree that getting rid of McCrystal was the right move, for the right reasons, as well as bringing in Patraeus.

    I believe that now warrants an “I was wrong” on your part.

  155. Tex and Rabbit: You guys said I universally spouted the “University” line. Every thing I mentioned is something where I am in the minority on a university campus. I did what you asked me to do. What more do you want:

    Tex – you are right on the conservation issue. I did forget that. My sincere apologies.

    Republican candidatesI have voted for?

    Anderson (1976 – Republican running as independent)
    Reagan (twice)
    Bush I (twice)
    Dole

    Democrats I have vote for:

    Kerry
    Obama

  156. Huck…. right was well. I admit that I forgot those things. Maybe it is the absolute disdain that you show when you disagree with Obama that thinking “knee jerk.”

  157. I can honestly say I don’t fully support any liberal positions.
    I was in a union once,a big one,don’t care for them,support organizing but would aggressively work against card check.

    Public schools? Don’t believe in them any longer. I totally believe in public education though.There’s a difference.

    PETA is a terrorist organization.

    Spotted Owl? Tastes like chicken. No not really. As Tex alluded to I think the Left would be shocked at how many conservatives support conservation efforts.

  158. Alfie said: I was in a union once,a big one,don’t care for them,support organizing but would aggressively work against card check.

    That is one I forgot – I don’t like card check either.

  159. Here’s one Hippie, though it not necessarily relegated to just liberals who don’t like this one.

    I have fought many a free capitalist and Conservative that one person titled both CEO and Chairman of the Board or even member should be illegal.

    Now that may not sound like much to an academician, but I promise you it puts me cross wise with most businessmen and capitalists. I’ve been called both fascist and socialist over that one.

  160. Now that may not sound like much to an academician, but I promise you it puts me cross wise with most businessmen and capitalists.

    Tex, I do understand. I know enough about business to understand the issues. We have some related problems here, where the same person serves as Provost and Dean of Faculty. Not only is that too much power in a single position, but it also sets up a conflict of interest.

  161. “Huck…. right was well. ”

    No. You cannot be both right and wrong when you state people “never” do something. “Never” is an absolute. It either is or isn’t.

    You were wrong. Period. Would have been nice to see you admit that without qualification.

  162. hippie 206
    the opening of the Gallup says
    PRINCETON, NJ — The healthcare reform legislation Congress passed in late March divided the public then and has not gained significant support in the three months since. emph Alfie
    The thing hasn’t even ramped up yet,aren’t you the slightest bit uncomfortable about how it may go?

  163. Actually, you didn’t. You said you forgot, and then qualified your forgetfulness with a copout that attempted to shift the blame of your error back onto us. You essentially said that it was our fault that you were wrong. That’s just childish.

    Admitting your error says you own it like a man. So it isn’t me who should feel better—it’s you.

  164. Alfie asked: The thing hasn’t even ramped up yet,aren’t you the slightest bit uncomfortable about how it may go?

    I think the -4 to +3 change in the spread is actually significant. I will have to check (they don’t report that change specifically).

    I am most interested, however, in the difference between under 65 and over 65. The younger demographic supports HCR by a substantial margin, and have shown substantial change.

    I don’t think the “repeal” crowd will be comforted at all by this.

  165. Hippie’s claim I won’t bother to substantiate. I don’t need to.

    The fact that seniors are not only the most dependent upon health care coverage by far, but by a wide margin also the most knowledgeable and informed says all we need to know.

    Young people have neither the knowledge yet, nor the dependence on health care to have much skin in the game. Just wait until they get to start paying for it.

    Just wait and we will see how popular Pres. Noodle Arm’s health care plan becomes. And I will bet a significant amount of money to anybody that wants to bet that by 2014, Obamacare will go down in flames.

  166. If there’s no benefit to domestic drilling …

    Tigre, who said no benefit? The claim is domestic drilling does not lead to American energy independence. You’re deliberately (or not) taking the simple statement and broadening to the absurd. Clearly any American company that drills domestically benefits from it, as do their American employees.

  167. As I read through these comments (I’m not finished yet) I am amazed by a few things.

    1) The failure of Tex and Tigre to recognize that we are a nation of short term thinking selfish bastards. It goes to HP’s assertion that people who care will spend a bit more for a car that doesn’t guzzle gas. We don’t have alternatives to oil because we won’t pay to research them. Plain and simple.

    2) Speaking of plain and simple, I have never seen such an elementary argument get such resistance. Let’s try again: we don’t have enough domestic oil to do us any good for any length of time … it’s a drop in the bucket compared to world output. What we do produce goes on the world market so it doesn’t make us independent. This notion that we are only counting “discovered reserves” scares the crap out of me. So you guys want us drilling holes in the Earth all over this country in search of Texas Tea just to quench our addiction?

    3) Tex, I guess a lot of R&D was going into electric cars back a few years ago when the Big 3 were producing gas guzzlers by the truckload. I know this sounds very simplistic but you’re telling me we can land a man on the moon but we can’t create an economical gas-independent automobile? I don’t buy it. The priority is not there for any number of reasons.

  168. BTW …. Tex you got any idea why we are not financing high speed rail? Why won’t we do ANYTHING to get ourselves out of this mess? Are we just a country of dumb-f*cks?

  169. We need to learn how to stop these things before we go on. I think that’s common sense.

    There is intelligence on the right side of the world! Thank you Rabbit!!!

    More of you need to follow Rabbit’s example and not be GOP acid-reflux spewers. Common sense says we need to stop and assess before we drill more. The Rabbit has common sense.

    Oh, BTW, Damn Rabbit … you were at the tower September 9? Sh*t! I crapped my pants just at the thought of Mo Atta and his band of merry men bringing in their schedule a few months and frying my ass but damn …. you were two days from being a truly Dead Rabbit. You must truly have lost it when you saw the news on the tube or did your friend call you before you had the TV on?

  170. Real leadership would have put personal differences aside and called his hand picked general into his office to discuss the shortcomings of the strategy.

    Truly an ass-worthy assessment. Someone hypnotized Tex and made him type those words. The man is smarter than that.

    Hey Tex … how you like Olbermann’s plan from last night? He said Obama should not accept Stanley’s resignation but instead hold it over him to leverage an eventual strategy change that gets us completely out of Afghanistan earlier than expected. Wouldn’t that have been sweet?

  171. HP, not to pick on you but I’d love to hear your logic on your voting record. I understand Anderson … hell, any independent appeals to me just on the premise of being independent. I came close to pulling the lever for that nutjob Perot. 🙂

    But I’m a bit confused on Bush I, Reagan and Dole. Did you consider them the lesser of two evils? (I know you don’t owe me any justification but I am always interested in knowing what drives a liberal (at least a social liberal as I suspect you are) to vote GOP.

  172. I think you’re a coward Rutherford for completely ignoring my obviously true comments from above. Your balls must have shriveled to the size of squirrel’s balls by now.You and Hippie ought to team up with Graychin, Curator and his toady Yellow Dog – the Royal Flush Blog. 🙂

    The malignant narcissist and phenomenal failure named Barry Sorento just canned his hand picked general – and brought in the man you called General Betray Us and rumored possible candidate for Republican President. Obama again proved himself weak and ineffectual. I knew the pud couldn’t handle one of his own bad mouthing him for his dithering.

    And you’re still as utterly clueless at why must continue domestic drilling as you were when you were telling us the surge wouldn’t work. You will never get it…

    At least three of us have simplified it to the nth degree for you, but you either ignored it, missed it, or couldn’t comprehend it.

    But with Bongo at the helm, you and I have finally found common ground – with this sham running the operations, we best leave now.

    😉

  173. HP, not to pick on you but I’d love to hear your logic on your voting record.

    Hey – no problem. My political views have had an unusual trajectory.

    I was raised in a very conservative military family. Actually, one of my earliest blog posts was about that.

    http://hippieprofessor.com/2009/09/04/moonbat-patriotism/

    Anyway, as a kid I absorbed most of the conservative values. One of my most vivid childhood memories is of sitting with my mother watching the Watergate hearings – as she threw things at the TV every time anyone said anything against Nixon.

    By my second year of college I had morphed into a social liberal – probably because of the exposure to diversity one gets in college. I still remained a foreign policy hawk and an economic conservative, though. Over the years my foreign policy and economic views moved toward the moderate range, and by the mid 90s I was calling myself an independent – though I still voted conservative.

    I didn’t finally concede that I was a liberal until about 6 or 7 years ago. On the economic side, it is when I finally recognized that a lot of the free market ideas I had cherished were just a cover for greed. On the military side, as I mentioned on another thread, the change came when I realized I had been lied to and used in the runup to the Iraq invasion.

    — hp

  174. HP the epiphanies you’ve had regarding both social and economic conservatism are the kinds I’d love to see Tex and others encounter but I won’t hold my breath. If Tex, a man who saw corporate BS up close and personal cannot admit the flaws of the free market economy, then there is little hope.

  175. Rutherford,

    What are the flaws of the free market economy? Fallibility and greed? That’s people, not the system.

    And even then, I could take the greediest, most fallible business man I ever met and still would think more of them than I do you lefty guys. In my opinion, y’all share their flaws with few good qualities. Like I said in my excerpt from the book I recommended, I find liberalism a mental disorder – truthfully.

    I explained it on Alfie’s blog today. There is no epiphany to encounter, unless I begin to lose my mind.

  176. Rutherford @214 what are you smoking? I addressed the points you made in your post. You and Hippie respond by dissembling. It seems like every time you and Hippie are called to task your strategy is to change the argument into some straw man bullshit.

  177. And speaking of plain and simple, I have never seen such an elementary bullshit argument garner serious consideration by anyone other than teenage schoolgirls. Maddow ain’t that heavy Ruhterford.

  178. “I realized I had been lied to and used in the runup to the Iraq invasion.”-hippieprof

    To think you are such an educated man that spews such craziness is mind boggling.

    You are in league with holocaust deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists and “birthers”.

    I’ve heard you say you were lied to several times, now.

    Do you realize that this accusation belies a serious lack of common sense?

    It’s simple. Do you really think Bush (and all the others that would have to be in on this conspiracy) would lie to the public and the UN about WMD KNOWING he would get caught in a few months?

    If Bush is so dastardly, why not keep the elaborate conspiracy going and plant WMD?

    Do understand that multiple intelligence agencies around the globe thought there was WMD?

    Do understand that SH pretended like he had WMD?

    Your a psychology guy, correct?’

    Ultimately, you just can’t stand the fact that when it comes down to it, the government/military/clandestine agencies don’t know everything, can you. That ultimately, hippieprof is sometimes alone in the dark, the warm and wet teet only a confused man behind the curtains. After all, your massive source of comfort can’t be that wrong, that would imply a lack of omnipotence. Thus, they lied to you. And that makes you feel better. So much safer that way, isn’t?

    Look man, I have a lot of reservations about both wars. I’m not sold. I will have to wait for tides of time like everyone else to see how it shakes out.

    In fact, I. I will take it a step farther. I think positioning the invasion of solely on WMD was a massive blunder. We had the right to invade with out concrete evidence of WMD. Bush may have ultimately hand cuffed us when it comes to the real threat, Iran.

    But for shit’s sake man, drop the lisping lie stuff.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s