BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!

Subject: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 05:22 PM

Here it is.

I think it is better than his race speech, which was brilliant!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM

That is one pow'ful speech indeed.

Thanks very much for the link. I would have missed it.

He's really laying it on the line. We've gone from importing a third to half of our ravenous oil habit.

This guy deserves to be the naton's leader, because he talks sense. Notice he gives due credit to John McCain when borrowing his phrases.




A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 05:57 PM

JEsus. I have just gotten through this speech, and the man is completely on top, with a hard-nosed feasible plan that is both bold and possible.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Goose Gander
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 05:59 PM

Good ideas, hope he follows through.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 06:15 PM

One of the most surprising remarks I have heard today came from John McCain. The snidity and snarkiness of it was breathtaking . Obama has a detailed program laid out for the next ten years, complete with supporting statistics and with mulitple major fronts including nanotechnology, alternative fuels, alternative vehicles design, budgets, social probgrams, etc. etc., and McCain said the speech was about inflating our tires.

Of all the stupid remarks, I swan!!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 06:24 PM

Damn, he's good.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 06:36 PM

If Obama blew up the Middle East oil fields, you would say how fantastic a choice it was and a real sign of leadership.

He is attempting to bribe voters. Open the oil reserves, fire up the offshore drilling, free money in the form of "rebates", and a chicken in very pot.

NOT a great speech, just more selling out and flip flopping, as he was against using the strategic reserve to bring prices down before he was for it--just like the offshore drilling.

His "call" for energy efficiency is a joke, as he presents no plan for how to go about increasing efficiency in any meaningful way. The idea of giving a tax credit to people who buy a hybrid? Please. The people who can AFFORD to buy a hybrid don't need the rebate, the people who CAN'T AFFORD A NEW CAR AT ALL need a rebate.

And as for "5 million new jobs"? Really?

Where the hell is going to pull those jobs out of? His derriere? And who gets to define the "clean energy" that gets the $150 billion investments to spur this bogus "job growth" hmmmmm?

This is Obama slamming the door on the environmental movement, and he will get the response from that movement come election day.

See y'all in November.

Or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 06:45 PM

Ooooohhh.... "snidity"?! Amos, you know I love it when you come up with words like that ; )

Dani (inch-by-inch, row-by-row... Yes We Can!)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 06:58 PM

What politicians say at this point is about getting elected. "Greatest country in the world" and so forth.

It's Monopoly Money. Only after the election does it become real money.

Obama is pretty obviously a better bet than McCain. Just about anyone would be a better bet than Bush has been. Obama is very probably an improvement on either of the Clinton's.

I very much hope he'll get elected, and that's a hope that's shared by people right across the political spectrum in most democratic countries. But I am sure some his most fervent admirers will find he doesn't live up to their dreams. Who could?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:00 PM

"Obama is very probably an improvement on either of the Clinton's."


                      NO! He's not!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peter T.
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:25 PM

This guy is really turning out to be a weasel.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:25 PM

Well, Rigs, I'm not too sure of that... I remember well Bill Clinton talkin' after Columbine about gun control... In essence, Clinton said, "I'm not going to do anything about it because the Repubnlican Congress won't pass it..." That didn't show courage or leadership at a time when the American people might have gotten behind him and passed some logical gun controls...

Fast forward to Rev. Wright.. Obama could have pulled a Clinton and said, "Hey, it will pass" but he didn't... He showed courage and talked about some very painfull stuff... He didn't have to do it... Just as he didn't have to make this speech on energy...

Clinton, IMO, was a Nixon Republican... Obama ain't... A pragmatist perhaps... But no Clintonite lap dog...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:37 PM

And you know, Joe Scho gets his hybrid rebate, but that doesn't hold a candle to the corporate welfare Obama just threw Detroit carmakers in this speech!

Oh wait--Michigan is one of those swing states where Obama isn't doing so well. Which also explains one of Obama's many of other sell outs of the week--he wants to welcome ALL the Michigan and Florida delegates to the convention!

Surprise, surprise!

Aren't we all just thrilled about our President To Be Sleazy Weasel!

Anyone see the article on the CBS website today, talking about how the Obama campaign is just as secretive as Bush/Cheney (but they behave like mellow fekkiws and wear jeans, instead of like rabid raccoons in Brooks Bros suits).

Let's all just sit back and wait now for Obama to nominate a Republican vp, shall we?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:37 PM

What I liked about the speech is that it seemed modeled on the Kennedy "moon shot" speech.

Challenges and promises, appealing to our better natures.


DV,

I do not enjoy pointing out something so blindingly obvious. But it seems necessary.

Many cars now have both hybrid and regular versions, with the hybrid versions costing a few thousand dollars more. The hybrid is better for the environment and for oil dependancy but generally the extra cost does not pay for its self in fuel savings. Millions of cars a being sold in this country so obviously people can afford them. What the rebates would do is give people incentive to choose the hybrid over the regular version. They could cut down on carbon and dependance on foreign oil without losing money.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:40 PM

Yeah DV,

Lets not help Michigan and three of the country's biggest employer's. Lets spend our money in Tokyo and Korea!

Hurray for Honda!!

Viva Kia!!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:53 PM

"ave you seen Obama's energy speech!"

Even for a Politician, it'd have to be better than his Apathy Speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 07:57 PM

LOL

I've seen the first draft of that one. Here's the beginning.

My grandmother was a typical apathetic person. She would get nervous when people were too energetic. "It makes me jumpy." She said."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:01 PM

Damn straight hooray for Honda.

And many millions more people cannot afford to buy hybrids.

Exactly 0.5% of the sales in 2004 were hybrids. In 2008? Final figures aren't in, but we do know that the minute gas prices drop, so do hybrid sales, as happened in 06/07. Hybrids were 2.5% of the market in 2007, a whopping 2% growth in three years.

You can read about it below, from the consumeraffairs.com website:

In California, the country's largest hybrid market, changing consumer attitudes toward hybrids are influenced by more than just gasoline prices and tax credits. Uncertainty in California over the availability of HOV lane stickers for new hybrids is an additional factor slowing sales for the Prius as well as other hybrids.

The federal tax credit available to buyers of the Prius was cut in half late in 2006. Until then, the Prius enjoyed the largest hybrid credit, $3,150. The credit shrank to $1,575 on October 1.

Despite dropping sales, prices for the Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid have remained virtually unchanged. The average price paid for a Prius, less any cash rebates, was $26,281 in November compared with $26,076 in August.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:04 PM

And I should mention, the above is from an article in Jan 07, so the inflation on the price of the hybrids isn't included in the $26,281 price tag.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:17 PM

Again, embarrassingly obvious, if they can't afford the hybrid, they can't afford the regular version of the same car. Is only a few thousand less.


If they can afford the regular version and a rebate allows them the hybrid for the same price, we are all better off.

Also, the cheapest cars, hybrid or not, generally get excellent mileage because they are smaller and have fewer features.

Millions of SUV drivers getting 25 MPG instead of 12 will make a huge difference in fuel prices and dependancy. That's part of what Obama's plan is about.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:17 PM

And Jaysus, can he spare the change? $150 billion over 10 years? Do the friggin' math. That is less per year than we are currently spending per month on our beloved 'War on Terror' (sic), most of it in Iraq.

What is this scam, Obama's cynical idea of a peace dividend in reverse, maybe?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:20 PM

DV:

Boy, is that what you think of as realism?

I beg to differ with you, and with Peter as well.

Where's the weasel in figuring a way to combine resources and incentives and march away from oil addiction?

It's a better job of "weaseling" than Clinton ever did in describing where we had to go, a better job than Bush could ever pretend to do, and a better job than McCain could possibly do. So if that's weaseling, let us make the most of it.

If instead of defamation and bitterness you started thinking about how such a program could be contributed to by you and yours, in a way that did not compromise your purest vision of our ideal energy scenarion, you might help us move ahead instead of just peeing on the tires.

He has just laid out a plan that could conceivably work to remedy the biggest messes in the current national scene, a straight dialogue on how it could be done, and all you can think to do about it is call him names.

I swan, you are hard-bitten cases indeed.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:20 PM

DV your 8:17 post is not internally consistent. As you say, 15 billion a year is peanuts for the federal government. Why would he need a peace dividend?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:21 PM

Sorry but you've been chumped. The Obama energy plan is about Obama getting elected, not about the energy and environmental crises we face as a nation and a planet.

It's all about beating McCain, nothing more, nothing less.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:31 PM

Nope,

Its about leadership.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:32 PM

I think I'll start a new 527 for you guys, and call it Progressives for Regressive Presidential Politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:34 PM

How will Obama reduce electricity use by 10% by the end of his first term, when we plug in one million new hybrids?

Gee Batman, this energy stuff is hard!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:40 PM

Easily, Bring the country to California standards. There is plenty of waste, especially in buildings. You didn't listen very carefully did you?

Also conventional hybrids, like the Prius, don't plug in. Gee Robin! Do you enjoy riding on the Yellow Hybrid Bus. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:45 PM

Obama cannot set state standards. And if he goes against the Detroit hybrid model (which they can't get to work, incidentally), they WILL be plug ins.

So, maybe Obama should give the carmakers his bribes back right now!

For you Obamamaniacs, from CNN:

Obama outlined three steps he'd take to meet that goal:

# Build fuel-efficient cars and have one million 150 mile-per-gallon plug-in hybrids on the roads within six years

# Require that 10 percent of the country's energy come from renewable sources by the end of his first term

# Call on businesses, government and the American people to meet the goal of reducing the demand for electricity 15 percent by the end of the next decade.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:56 PM

Yo, DV/Old Guy/Dickey ... You remind me of McCain... All criticism of Obama and not friggin' ideas of yer own... Not one... Just smears and swifboating...

You are quickly runnin' outta places to hide here... We ****know**** exactly who you are... Your Republican partisan stripes blare so loudly that they you don't need a computer 'cause I can here yer screamin' without it...

Ain't foolin' me, OldGuy/Dickey/Whomever...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Alice
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 08:58 PM

I found this in the news in the last few days: Discovery by MIT research solving the cost problems of solar energy. Electric power plants can convert to solar energy almost anywhere using this new development.
PLUG IN! TURN ON! DRIVE! - Alice
-------------

Solar Power Breakthrough: Researchers have made a major advance in inorganic chemistry that could lead to a cheap way to store energy from the sun. In so doing, they have solved one of the key problems in making solar energy a dominant source of electricity.

Daniel Nocera, a professor of chemistry at MIT, has developed a catalyst that can generate oxygen from a glass of water by splitting water molecules.

"This discovery is simply groundbreaking," says Karsten Meyer, a professor of chemistry at Friedrich Alexander University, in Germany. "Nocera has probably put a lot of researchers out of business." For solar power, Meyer says, "this is probably the most important single discovery of the century."

Click Here for rest of the article.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 09:13 PM

>># Call on businesses, government and the American people to meet the goal of reducing the demand for electricity 15 percent by the end of the next decade.

From what orifice did you get 10% by the end of his first term?

Was that a straw man? I am shocked! simply shocked! that you would use a straw man!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 09:19 PM

In another article on Google News, they said 10% by the end of his first term.

This article says 15% in a decade.

Thanks for splitting nose hairs in a pathetic and hopeless attempt to deflect my criticism of Obamanation's Energy Plan.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 09:23 PM

Alice's article suggests a real-life truth: scientists will invent things that improve our lives. Politicians will not.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peter T.
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 09:26 PM

Obama did the same thing with warrantless spying. I think he thinks that politics in this round is about compromise -- he's always been big on compromise. Give them offshore drilling, and I can have my thing. His problem (like a lot of people's) is that the right wing figured out how to roll this awhile ago. Stake out a farright position, and then claim that compromise means going halfway back to a position that is less far out, but still nothing you would want. This has been the strategy for how long now?

I just don't figure how he thinks this is going to get Democrats to get out and really hustle for him. What Democrats want is someone with some principles to say HELL NO.

This weaselling strategy is just not going to work. He is going to lose this election (unless of course John McCain does it for him, which is certainly plausible, given that McCain has no grasp on reality.)   

BUT WEASEL IS AS WEASEL DOES.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 09:27 PM

Splitting nose hairs?

Simple math will tell you that one goal is way more attainable than the other. pay attention to what you are saying. OK?

People said that we couldn't land on the moon in ten years. We did. Obama's goals are more attainable than that feat and the goals are more important to out future.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 11:34 PM

He laid out the parameters of a program that could work if it was pursued vigorously.

Noone argues that the benefits are critical to the future of the nation: less dependence, revitalized manufacturing, more reliance on renewables, etc., etc. So what the hell is the natter with you yahoos that you think the correct response is to attack the speaker?

I have yet to see anyone come up with a rebuttal based on the facts. You guys have spent way tooo long at the end of Bitter Street. Snap out of it, buddyroe.

Get the numbers straight and lets see if you can arrive at a better plan to acheive comparable goals.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 11:49 PM

Except reducing energy demand by that amount in the time frame he is talking about isn't as plausible as getting to the moon, because NO ONE has been able to slow, much less reverse demand for energy.

Today's speech, Friday's interview--is pure political pandering for votes by Obama, just like it was when McCain did the same the thing.

Both McCain and Obama are using the Bush strategy on offshore drilling (ie linking gas prices to offshore drilling, the same way they linked S. Hussein to 9/11) to rationalize flipping their position on drilling, in order to get votes and donations from the oil industry.

So far, it is working great for McCain.

We'll see how it lays out for Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 11:58 PM

Energy Pimping
By Kevin Drum

Aug 4, 2008

(Political Animal) ENERGY PIMPING....From the LA Times this afternoon:

    Democrat Barack Obama called today for tapping the nation's strategic oil reserves to help drive down gasoline prices, a shift from his previous position on the issue. The reversal is the second refinement in Obama's energy policy....

Every single story I've read about Obama's energy speech today has the exact same lead: it's yet another switcheroo from the Democratic candidate. Flip flop, flip flop.

And we can't blame this one on the media, folks: Obama really is flopping around on energy policy, and he's doing it in the most craven possible way, switching from correct but politically risky stands to dumb panders. In fact, between the two of them, McCain and Obama have now pretty much written the handbook on idiotic energy pimping: a gas tax holiday, offshore drilling, opening up the SPR, a windfall profits tax, and nukes for all. I don't think either one has come out for a massive coal liquification program yet, but since that's about the only thing left that's worse than what they've offered so far, I assume it can't be more than a few days away.

And yes, I know that underneath the BS Obama has a pretty good energy policy and McCain doesn't. Big deal. That energy policy isn't going to see the light of day unless Obama starts building public support for it. So far he isn't even trying.



Copyright 2008

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:02 AM

From LA Times:


Barack Obama shifts on tapping national oil reserves

In a campaign speech in Michigan, the candidate suggested releasing oil from the emergency stockpile, a relief plan reminiscent of President Clinton's in 2000.

By Michael Muskal and Peter Nicholas, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
12:07 PM PDT, August 4, 2008

LANSING, MICH. -- Democrat Barack Obama called today for tapping the nation's strategic oil reserves to help drive down gasoline prices, a shift from his previous position on the issue.

The reversal is the second refinement in Obama's energy policy. Last week, he said that he would reluctantly consider accepting some offshore oil drilling. Obama had previously said he opposed such drilling, which is strongly backed by rival John McCain, who has urged that states be allowed to decide whether to drill.

McCain has been able to score political points on energy issues in recent weeks, particularly in swing states such as Michigan.

Recent polls show that McCain has gained some traction on the energy issue. For example, the latest Quinnipiac University poll for the Wall Street Journal and washingtonpost.com shows that Obama tops McCain 46% to 42% compared with a previous lead of 48% to 42%.

Energy issues are the leading concern -- more important in most polls than the war in Iraq -- and voters say they support offshore oil drilling. Other polls show similar results in the West and Southwest, also key electoral battlegrounds.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:06 AM

Obama outlined three steps he'd take to meet that goal:

# Build fuel-efficient cars and have one million 150 mile-per-gallon plug-in hybrids on the roads within six years

Is that possible just because he says so?

# Require that 10 percent of the country's energy come from renewable sources by the end of his first term.

Is that possible and at what cost?

# Call on businesses, government and the American people to meet the goal of reducing the demand for electricity 15 percent by the end of the next decade.

Whaaaa? He says we have an energy crisis so use less? We have to solve the problem ourselves?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:26 AM

"Stereo politicians, talking out of both sides of their mouths....."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:30 AM

Some may be interested in:

Transcript: Obama's 'New Energy for America' Speech

Originally Aired: August 4, 2008

John

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 08:09 AM

",,,0.5% of the sales in 2004 were hybrids. In 2008? Final figures aren't in, but we do know that the minute gas prices drop, so do hybrid sales, as happened in 06/07. Hybrids were 2.5% of the market in 2007, a whopping 2% growth in three years.

Looked at the other way, it's an increase of 400%. Carry on increasibg at that rate and in ten years or so the entire sales would be hybrid.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 08:51 AM

Yeah, so I wonder why we haven't carried on at that rate, huh McGrath of Harlow?

The purchase of hybrids in the US is still rare, when compared to all other vehicles.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:08 AM

Responses from environmental groups are starting to dribble in (if you want to know why it's a dribble, read "Been Brown So Long It Looked Like Green to Me" by Jeffrey St Clair).

Here are excerpts I've gleaned so far, from the mainstream (not radical) environmental mags online:

Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder was quick to criticize Obama's position switch. "Friends of the Earth Action endorsed Barack Obama in May in large part because he spoke out against the 'gas tax holiday' gimmick that would have done nothing to reduce our dependence on oil," Blackwelder said in a statement Monday afternoon. "That's why it's so disappointing to see Obama now say he would consider expanding offshore drilling, even though he knows it is not a real solution to the energy crisis that is devastating our environment and our economy." Blackwelder also criticized the "Gang of 10" legislation for including funding for liquefied coal and nuclear power.

Adam Kolton, the senior director of congressional and federal affairs for the National Wildlife Federation, says there's been more than enough compromising on drilling already, pointing to the large portion of the Gulf of Mexico that was opened to drilling in 2006 and the part of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska that President Clinton freed up in 1998. "In the case of the environment, we've been compromising," he said. "I mean, at some point, you can say let's compromise, but you keep giving away more and more."

Kolton also criticized the "Gang of 10" plan. "This is like a BLT sandwich with just the lettuce and tomato," he said. "There's no bacon. We've got to have things that really move us away from our addiction to oil and help solve global warming. This proposal doesn't get it done."

League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski knocked the compromise mindset too. "Once we have a new president and more forward-thinking members in the House and Senate, we don't believe we will need a 'compromise' on offshore drilling, which will be yet another giveaway to Big Oil and will provide no relief for hard hit consumers," saud Karpinski in an statement to Grist. "We will resist any effort to pay this ransom which George Bush, John McCain, and Big Oil are demanding in exchange for the release of real investments in clean, renewable energy."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:10 AM

ALl of which has nothing to do with the subject.

DV, as he made perfectly clear in the speech, had you but paid attention, it is simply untrue that no-one has managed the demand of energy. He cites in particular the state of California as an example.

ANd McCain did not do the same thing by a long shot.

You're being intransigent, obstreperous and conclusively ill-informed.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:13 AM

But the mainstream environmental organizations that are addicted to the Washington gravy train, predictably also praised Obama's energy plan.

No other cause demonstrates how effectively the Democratic party has systemically destroyed the progressive left movement in the US by co-opting it and taking "inside" the party apparatus, than the mainstream environmental lobby.

For instance, here is what the mighty Sierra Club leadership had to say:

A Sierra Club press release on Monday ignored the offshore-drilling issue entirely and simply heaped praise on Obama's energy platform (and scorn on John McCain's). "Sen. Obama's plan will put America on the path to a clean energy future because it prioritizes efforts that will benefit working families instead of the outdated fossil-fuel industries," said Sierra Club Political Director Cathy Duvall. "Sen. Obama supports creating millions of jobs by investing in the cleanest, cheapest, and fastest technologies to meet our energy needs and stimulate our economy."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:29 AM

No, I'm stating the opinion of an environmental activist, Amos. Because you don't like that opinion doesn't make me intransigent, obstreperous and conclusively ill-informed."

I would also like to point out to Alice, the story she pointed to about the supposed MIT miracle, is nothing of the sort.

From Grist:

Energy doesn't come from the ether

The hoopla about this all over the internet is on a par with those who write as if energy efficiency creates energy. Energy efficiency uses less for a given task, but doesn't create energy. And this purportedly nearly magical catalyst can't create more energy than the electricity that goes into it. Since regular old electrolysis can be up to 70% effective, how much better can this be? You still have to produce more extra energy than you would need for all the things you want to do when the sun's not shining brightly on your panels, and you still have to convert the energy twice, losing some of it each time. But this sounds so reassuringly utopian to those who don't think rationally about the bottom line: the amount of the sun's energy that falls on a given surface in the best of circumstances and the conversion of that energy into electricity or, in this case, into electricity, then hydrogen, then back into electricity.

This hype from MIT doesn't change this basic fact: the energy of sunlight is extremely diffuse. Thus, capturing it--even in the most efficient manner possibly allowed by the laws of physics, much less with multiple energy-losing conversions in between production and use--would require vast seas of solar panels on the scale of tens of thousands of square miles to supply even only the present electrical needs of the USA (30,000 square miles, according to Scientific American, for just some of the energy we need).

But you can tell from the excitement online that this marriage of two of the most-exaggerated energy panaceas of the unrealistic future has the dreamers' hearts all aflutter. Sunshine is wonderful, but it won't provide all the energy we need. Nor will sunshine and wind. And MIT isn't going to change that. You can't beat the laws of physics.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:30 AM

"Sierra Club Political Director Cathy Duvall (said): 'Sen. Obama supports creating millions of jobs by investing in the cleanest, cheapest, and fastest technologies to meet our energy needs and stimulate our economy.'"

Yep, the great conservation organizations of the past are now Environmental groups. Just cheering sections for Democrat politicos. No concern about plants and animals, just politics and keeping the donations maxed out.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:41 AM

Not all environmental organizations, pdq. Just the K Street enviros. Their top leaders regularly use the revolving door between the Capitol and K Street. It is true they work for the Democratic party. But that is mostly due to the fact the Republican party won't hire them.

I should add that Jeffrey St Clair has another book just out on US environmental politics, called "Born Under a Bad Sky: Notes from the Dark Side of the Earth".

Also over at Grist this week is a very telling article on a poll done on Gen Y and green industries. Here it is:



What companies do today's trendsetters consider to be the top 15 green brands? It's not who you might think ...

A survey of 100 Gen Y'ers (born 1979-1993) asked which brands they perceived to be most eco-friendly. Here are the top 15:

    * Whole Foods
    * Trader Joe's
    * Toyota
    * Honda
    * Google
    * Aveda
    * Zipcar
    * American Apparel
    * Ikea
    * 7th Generation
    * Apple
    * The Body Shop
    * Starbucks
    * Netflix
    * Method

The aim of the survey, the consulting firm said, was to "discover which companies are going beyond the niche segment of hard-core Greenies to win over influential Gen Y's."

In making their selections, those surveyed told Outlaw Consulting that qualities among the standouts included trailblazers that went green in a big way long before their competitors, brands with clean, minimalist design and products in categories that are key to some of their basic needs -- like things they eat, wear or put on their bodies.

Sigh. Kids these days ...

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:50 AM

Is it any wonder they don't see Obama and the Democrats as the greenwashers they are?

I mean, Al Gore finagled himself a Nobel for saving the environment. I guess he had to find some way to do it, since they wouldn't give him one for inventing the Internet, eh?

Here is the deal. Want to know how we're doing in terms of our environmental politics? Look to how the Democratic presidential nominee's agenda now reflects the Bush/Cheney energy agenda.

For far too long, Democrats have claimed capitulation was really just bi-partisan compromise. Nowhere has this been more evident than on the Iraq war and the environment.

Obama will, very soon, come out in support of resurrecting and redeeming the nearly dead nuclear power and coal industries as "clean energy" alternatives. You want to know who will get the $150 billion he claims will save the environment in his energy plan?

Answer: it won't be the innovators and inventors of renewables and authentically green industries. No, sirree!

He already told us yesterday, in his speech in Lansing. He'll throw a little to the Detroit carmakers, to save them from going under.

Coal and gas industries/utilities.

Nuclear power industries/utilities.

In other words, Obama is gonna give all the incentive money to Big Polluters.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:56 AM

GUEST,DV:

You really do need to join Mudcat as a full member. You have much more to say than some of the stale crowd of over-posters we have now.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:00 AM

And like I said yesterday, $150 billion over 10 years is a cruel joke. That paltry sum wouldn't even begin to put a dent in the growth of energy demand, much less reverse it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:06 AM

Yep, the great conservation organizations of the past are now Environmental groups (the Sierra Club). Just cheering sections for Democrat politicos. No concern about plants and animals, just politics and keeping the donations maxed out.


                You got that right! If they cared anything about the environment, they'd take a stand against illegal immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:09 AM

Riginslinger,

What has that statement to do with the price of eggs?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Joseph P
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:22 AM

It depends on the CO2 emmissions in egg production, and egg consumption among ethno-specific immigrant groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:27 AM

Bingo! That's the deal.

Thanks for helping me figure that one out there, Joseph P.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:42 AM

On the other hand, in regards to pollution- Illegal immigration is one form of population increase ( unless the illegals kill enough legals to offset that). Increased population in a specific area increases pollution and energy use.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:52 AM

Dv,

You've made me see the light. A vote for the Republicans is a vote for the environment!
Four more years!!!
Four more years!!!
Four more years!!!

LOL!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:55 AM

I find it really puzzling. This guy Obama is smart, energetic, and skilled; he's putting together a broad plan for revitalizing a moribund economy and breaking out of what is essentially a death spiral, and all you *(^&*^&*^s can do is generate nasty remarks, cynical attacks and generally try to run him down; despite the fact that he is pretty clearly the best leadership option out there at present. HE's twice as articulate as McCain and seems to be the source of most of McCain's good ideas. So, what is it about him that compels you to try and make nothing out of him? I gotta say, the human psyche is a gennyou-wine Wonderland.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:09 AM

A mindless, stupid vote is a mindless, stupid vote.

Not all Republicans are in the pocket of Big Polluters, just most of them.

McCain's energy policy isn't that far apart from Obama's, he is just more honest about it, is all. McCain will come right and tell you, he is shilling for nukes and coal.

Obama, OTOH, veils and hides his support for nukes and coal by burying that support in the fine print, but it is there.

Neither of these two candidates is discussing the even greater environmental crisis that has been with us for decades already, the water crisis.

Do you know how much water dirty energy uses and pollutes to the point of being unusable?

Amos, the problem you are having is being able to think outside the "must vote Democrat with no dissent" box.

Perhaps you are one of those Democratic party creatures who is disturbed by the diversity of opinion among grassroots progressives, whose votes aren't, after all, owned by your party.

Maybe that is why you are puzzled. But the main reason why you seem to be puzzled is, you seem to be easily confounded by people who don't share your personal view of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:22 AM

"Obama Nails It: Calls For Release of 70 Million Barrels From The Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Posted August 4, 2008 | 05:35 PM (EST) (Huffington Post)

Finally we have some one on the national presidential stage willing to confront the staggeringly high oil prices at its core. Nothing would be more immediately effective than a willingness to release oil from the STP to rein in oil prices. It would immediately impact the psychology of the traders, having them begin a run for the exits. It would be a signal to oil producers, most especially OPEC that our days of being patsies to their cartel corruption are at an end. And it would have an immediate and salutary impact on the price of oil. Witness today simply mentioning the possibility broke the price of oil almost immediately by over $5 per barrel to under $120/bbl ending the day a shade under $4 barrel lower...."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:33 AM

Codswallop, DV. I singed up with the Dems solely for the purpose of voting for Obama in the primaries.

Furthermore, Obama's discussion of nuclear technolgy was explicit, and his mention of coal was explicit as parts of the overall plan. It was poken plain as day, and there was not a whit of dishonesty about it. How do you get "fine print" in a speech, anyway?

Your criticisim continues to seem to me to be disingenuous and hypercritical. And what puzzles me is that you are projecting such ignobility on a decent intelligentm an who is trying to bring together a national effort in a positive direction.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:38 AM

"You won't hear me say this too often, but I couldn't agree more with the explanation that Senator McCain offered a few weeks ago. He said, "Our dangerous dependence on foreign oil has been thirty years in the making, and was caused by the failure of politicians in Washington to think long-term about the future of the country."

What Senator McCain neglected to mention was that during those thirty years, he was in Washington for twenty-six of them. And in all that time, he did little to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. He voted against increased fuel efficiency standards and opposed legislation that included tax credits for more efficient cars. He voted against renewable sources of energy. Against clean biofuels. Against solar power. Against wind power. Against an energy bill that – while far from perfect – represented the largest investment in renewable sources of energy in the history of this country. So when Senator McCain talks about the failure of politicians in Washington to do anything about our energy crisis, it's important to remember that he's been a part of that failure. Now, after years of inaction, and in the face of public frustration over rising gas prices, the only energy proposal he's really promoting is more offshore drilling – a position he recently adopted that has become the centerpiece of his plan, and one that will not make a real dent in current gas prices or meet the long-term challenge of energy independence.

George Bush's own Energy Department has said that if we opened up new areas to drilling today, we wouldn't see a single drop of oil for seven years. Seven years. And Senator McCain knows that, which is why he admitted that his plan would only provide "psychological" relief to consumers. He also knows that if we opened up and drilled on every single square inch of our land and our shores, we would still find only three percent of the world's oil reserves. Three percent for a country that uses 25% of the world's oil. Even Texas oilman Boone Pickens, who's calling for major new investments in alternative energy, has said, "this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of."

"

(Excerpt from speech. Text can be found here. It was, by the way, a terrific speech.)

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:39 AM

That isn't what your posting history indicates, Amos. Quite the contrary.

Like I and Stringsinger have recently said in recent threads about Obama and McCain, most of us who would vote for any Democrat with a pulse do so purely to vote against the Republicans.

The only gung-ho Obama idealists I know are kids--like the same ones who list Apple as a green company.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:44 AM

Snide ignorant lies and distortions are surprising? No but they are ultimatly dismaying.

I find it puzzling that those most critical of the details involvwd in correcting our biggest mistakes in this civilization, are the same people who seldom see or respond with an understanding of the BIG PICTURE. For these people I began to illustrate the big picture in actual pictures. They may not have been woth a thousand words but the best ones were succint and blatantly true.

I used to think that when we speak/write about the 'big picture' it was perhaps just too obvious for people to respond or even bother to amplify their agreement.

These people are not merely missing the forest for the trees , they are missing the whole earth. Point this out and they start yelling and snarling.

Then it was theorized that the snide niggling about an obscure detail, be it true or false, was an intentional distraction to help hide the big obvious threatening picture, thereby preserving the grasp of power by the Cheney McCain types who hold constant cold and hot running warfare as the best and only example of the strength of the United States.

Have they no decency? Have they no insight? Have they no conscience?
Of course they do. Its just that they also have the most primitive tribal mindset that has served mankind for the last 70,000 years.
There is no more room or need for them in our instant global world.
Not politically, religiously, militarily, enviormentally, psychologically or even personally.

Deep down in their fear ridden hippocampus I believe they realize this and like a caged animal will do any savage thing imaginable to overpower and over throw their true masters... which is "We the People."

That many of us have evolved beyond the "GetEm" mentality is our strenth and not a weakness, no matter how loud the savages yell and complain.


One thing that John McCan't is betting on is to not under estimate the herd mentality of people who have grown comfortable in being led,
just as long as the respondsibility for that leadership is never placed back on them. I know of no individualy that was full goose bonkers for Bush... who now makes any personal apology or acceptance of the respondsibility for that irrespondsible idiot.


They were in for a penny and lost all their home and job and still can't voice an appropriate outrage. Just maybe McCan't will make the legacy for Bush family globalism finally work and free credit will reign again. Those fairy tales were meant for children who are easily decieved.


As for the energy speech...It is very realistic!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:46 AM

Facts is facts, DV, and your opinions won't even make them take notice. I supported John Kerry, but I did so as a registered Independent. It is quite presumptuous of you to try and correct me on my own history.

Oh....here's what your Old WHite Boy has to say about solving the energy crisis:

"Sen. John McCain, (R) presidential candidate: "We need to offshore drill for oil and natural gas. We need to drill here and we need to drill now, and anybody who says we can achieve energy independence without using and increasing these existing energy resources, either doesn't have the experience to understand the challenge we face, or isn't giving the American people some straight talk." "

Isn't that inspiring, and doesn't it demonstrate a deep understanding and breadth of vision? Isn't that the sort of slavish single-solution monomania you want leading this great nation of ours? He takes my breath away! (And I mean that in the worst possible way). Compared to the wide-spectrum leadership shown in O)bama's energy speech, this guy is a shriveled tool of corporate interests.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:47 AM

"HE's twice as articulate as McCain and seems to be the source of most of McCain's good ideas..."


                Yeah, if you like being talked down to, he's more articlulate than McCain, but his new energy program is exactly what McCain's program has been since the campaign started. He saw McCain coming up in the polls, and co-opted McCain's energy policy.

                The only thing that's different is using the US reserves to drive down the current price, and that idea has come up every week or so since the original oil embargos back in the mid 1970's.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:51 AM

Donuel, are you suggesting that voting Democratic will reverse the dismaying state of the environment and miraculously solve the challenges to our survival on this planet?

Man, there ARE some naive people in this forum!

For the record, those of us who have seen both Democrat and Republican presidents and Congresses come and go, realize the political institutions are the problem, and the reason we find ourselves in the mess we are in today.

So criticizing Obama is no different than criticizing Bush/Clinton/Bush/Reagan/Carter on the environment--there is plenty to criticize for all of them, and the Congress even more so.

Maybe you all should follow the advice of the Dalai Lama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn6tv38jFRI

You can always vote for McKinney or Nader.

I won't, but it is a legitimate alternative to Obama, especially if you want to vote to break the race and gender barriers, and focus the national agenda on the need to truly rid ourselves of Anglo American cultural and political hegemony, and start making our leaders look and act like us, rather than the Skull and Bones Society.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:53 AM

The strategic oil reserves are there for a good reason: we may be attacked again and find ourselves at war. In some cases we paid more for that oil than market value because it was considerd necessary. Leave it where it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:58 AM

Well if all you can do is name call I suggest that you and John Savage are only seperated by a missing father.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 11:58 AM

Well, I'd like some pointers to why you say what he said was a reflectiopn of earlier positions byu McCain. I haven't seen McCain present an energy platform, so I'm at a disadvantage on this one. Help me out here.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:05 PM

Having listened through the speech, which was understandably pure electioneering, three things struck me immediately:

- First is that he decrys certain "solutions", then says that he will be prepared to adopt them;

- Secondly he glosses over the absolutely enormous costs of the programmes he intends to promote and the inevitable disruption their implementation will result in;

- Thirdly he glosses over and fails to tell the American public the truth loudly enough - Dependence upon "foreign" oil is down to the personal consumption of refined product by the American people. If you want to reduce that dependence upon "foreign" oil in the short term - use less, get used to paying more.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:05 PM

Donuel, who are you accusing of name calling, and where are they doing it?

Why not try going to McCain's website, or reading the mainstream press?

Obama's own campaign ad attacking McCain this week speaks to McCain's flip flop on offshore drilling in June.

The Washington Post is the source of the Obama campaign's information used in that ad, but I believe it was investigative reporters from Mother Jones that actually uncovered the links to the oil industry donations that poured into McCain's campaign coffers after he flipped on offshore drilling, to the tune of $1.3 million. The Obama ad overstates that amount, and calls it "$2 million", but hey-a quarter mil here, a quarter mil there--what's the diff?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:09 PM

pdq,

Obama's proposal is to replace light sweet crude in the reserve for heavier grades that are not so good for cars. Its a compromise for sure, but it is not likely to put us in danger.

I certainly don't have any problem with Obama making compromises to get things done. Its what he has been saying he would do all along. If I wanted someone stubborn, i would have supported Hillary.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:13 PM

"I haven't seen McCain present an energy platform..."


                I understand McCain is giving out air-gauges as a way mocking Obama. But McCain was the first in the campaign with "off-shore oil drilling, nukes, liquified coal, oil shale, and etc." These are all ideas that have been on the table for years, so there's nothing new. But Obama wanted nothing that wasn't "Green" to start with, and when he saw McCain gaining on him, he changed his tune.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:15 PM

Ah.

P'raps so.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:21 PM

I haven't seen anyone besides the Rove attack machine saying that opening the reserve would endanger our national security.

Opening the reserves for the claimed purpose of offering relief to voters is pandering, not threatening national security.

We aren't ALL idiots vulnerable to the propaganda machine.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:35 PM

The reserve is there for strategic reasons. Strategic, cold war reasons. Republicans still talk about the need for B1 Bombers, they still talk about the importance of that reserve. Since 1989, its been a way for the President to try to influence oil prices. But buying or selling 80,000 barrels per day does not have a real effect on they supply.


Here is why...

The total world consumption of crude oil in 1996 was 71.7 million barrels per day (there are 42 US gallons in a barrel, or 159 litres). OPEC estimates that total world oil consumption could reach around 100 million barrels per day by the year 2020.
(From OPEC Annual Statistical Bulletin: 1996, OWEM Scenarios Report: 1998.)
http://www.opec.org/faqs.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:37 PM

Right, but that doesn't change the fact that Obama opening the reserves to bring down gas prices for a week or two is pure vote pandering.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:42 PM

They are called "strategic" oil reserves for a reason. That oil is just where it belongs. It is not there to provide a cheap campaign tool for a political candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:45 PM

The problem isn't the politicians...its the simple minded people who believe their obvious pack of lies,,,on both sides!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peace
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:45 PM

Bingo!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:50 PM

And Obama pandering opens him to legitimate criticism from both the progressives and conservatives.

Why? Because the educated voter knows we are on the brink of a very serious reckoning regarding energy and the environment.

We are going to feel pain--a lot of pain, as a result of the US political institutions being in bed with corporations.

There is no changing that fact. There is no way to save us from ourselves.

I doubt I will vote at all for president now. I really was going to vot for Obama until last Friday. But this feels like 2000 to me. What is the point? Voting for either candidate just means I am willing to continue particpating in a corrupt political system.

I'm about to join with my cynical friends who believe that no meaningful change can happen until either the corrupt political system is fixed or collapses under it's own weight, and new political systems in North America rise to take the place of the current US political system.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 12:51 PM

You got that right, Guest from Sanity!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:03 PM

>>They are called "strategic" oil reserves for a reason.

Yes and the reason is that they are there so that there would be tank and bomber fuel in reserve for war against the Soviet Union.

I am not so sure that it is purely pandering. There is a psychological component to oil prices. There is also the attempt to counter Bush/McCain pandering.

There is also the fact that the oil companies are blaming a large part of the gas prices on a lack of refining capacity. If I am not mistaken, light sweet crude is the easiest to refine into gasoline and the grade that best suits most US refineries. Swapping light sweet crude in the reserve for other grades could bring more gasoline to market sooner and be the quickest way to immediately impact supply and demand.

It also would not make a big difference on our ability to defend ourselves from the Soviets. M1 tanks will burn just about anything. So when the red army uses the naval capacity they never had to land the tanks on our shores that they used to have, we'll be just as ready as we would otherwise have been. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:08 PM

Hey, DV, check out my post history! I can't believe that 'intelligent' creative people would have taken exception to the things I've posted..
but they do...go figure!...and I'm on their side!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:10 PM

>>>There is no changing that fact. There is no way to save us from ourselves.

I doubt I will vote at all for president now. I really was going to vot for Obama until last Friday. But this feels like 2000 to me. What is the point? Voting for either candidate just means I am willing to continue particpating in a corrupt political system.

I'm about to join with my cynical friends who believe that no meaningful change can happen until either the corrupt political system is fixed or collapses under it's own weight, and new political systems in North America rise to take the place of the current US political system.<<

If you believe this, if it doesn't make a difference, then why are you pissing on Amos?
Its just mean spirited trolling.

If politics is irrelevant, why don't you go find something relevant to occupy your time.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:17 PM

Yes it is pandering, because it is a one time shot, and will do nothing over the long haul to help Joe Schmow feel less pain at the pump.

Same deal with his "free rebate" offer of $1,000 per family/$500 per individual. It doesn't do a thing long term to deal with the energy and environmental crises, but it does pander in that "chicken in every pot" way.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:18 PM

until either the corrupt political system is fixed or collapses under it's own weight, and new political systems in North America rise to take the place of the current US political system.

How would you bring that about , GfS? The only path I can see is filling the system itself with people of conscience willing to change it for the common good; either that or an armed and bloody revolution. The latter is not viable; and, I hope anyway, not inevitable.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:23 PM

"...Yes and the reason is that they are there so that there would be tank and bomber fuel in reserve for war against the Soviet Union."

"It also would not make a big difference on our ability to defend ourselves from the Soviets... M1 tanks..."    {2X by JtS}

Ever hear about the US Navy's strategic oil reserve at Elk Hills, California? Maybe if we referred to the Teapot Dome Scandal of 1922 it would start coming back to you.

The US had oil set aside for strategic reasons before the Soviet Union existed. Nice try, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:27 PM

I can't believe that 'intelligent' creative people would have taken exception to the things I've posted


Ya know, GfS, I've found many of your posts thoughtful and interesting; and I have found some of them vituperative and nasty, or wildly over-generalized.

Guess which ones I've taken exception to??


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:38 PM

Amos, that statement was mine.

No one person or political party brings about the collapse of a political system from systemic, widespread corruption, or finally gets it reformed. When those things happen, there are millions of fingerprints on them.

How does one reform the corrupt system currently in place?

I don't have an answer to that one. But I am becoming more and more convinced by friends and colleagues that refusing to participate in the corrupt system may well hasten it's demise.

While painful, difficult, and dangerous, that may well be what needs to happen to heal the environment, and put the crooks out of business for awhile.

In the big scheme of world history, this year's election isn't nearly as important as some are making it out to be (like the media and election industries that make obscene profits from the year round, 24/7 two party campaign industry).

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:38 PM

Pdq, Before WWII there are a number of great powers, with huge armies to worry about. Afterwards there was one. Now there are none.

If the reserve is not for financial emergencies, like this one, then please tell me what the strategic purpose is?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:40 PM

Indeed who ever is elected as the executive figurehead of the US goverment, he or she will have to play monopoly with the devil. the devil goes by many names in this regard: the Military Industrial Complex, the Octopus, the 5 families, etc.

Playing monopoly with the devil is daunting since the devil owns the bank and indeed owns the money that bought the game of buying whatever goverment and laws the devil desires.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:40 PM

Actually, Jack, there is one. It's the USA. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:40 PM

;-) nice try though!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 01:43 PM

Yeah Little hawk,

The US is stockpiling crude to fight us. Its a Pogo thing

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:06 PM

"...Before WWII there are a number of great powers, with huge armies to worry about...Now there are none."

Another statement of opinion, not fact.

China, by virtue of its population of 1.5 billion people, its enormous economy, and its technology (mostly stolen from the US).is the most powerful country on Earth.

The Unied States and Russia are powerful due to our economy and thechnology, but India, with 1.2 billion people is nobody to mess with.

Pakistan and Iran are smaller, but quite dangerous if provoked. Pakistan is poised to drive into India on a huge new road they are building and annex Kashmir. War could result, and this is coming in just a few years.

The world is less safe than it was at the end of WWII.

Leave our strategic oil reserves where they are. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:30 PM

Yes, there are some other great powers out there potentially...waiting in the wings. And China is the foremost of them. I think that the American Age, in fact, is nearing its end and that the Chinese Age is on the way.

That doesn't necessarily mean another great war, though it could. It might just mean a gradual shift in predominance from one part of the world to another.

"The world is less safe than it was at the end of WWII."

I agree. And it is less safe at present primarily because of the very aggressive and reckless imperial policies of the USA/UK Axis, who are trying by military intervention to control all the oil in the Middle East and Central Asian regions.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:49 PM

DV;

Hell, I guess it's a tossup between selective apathy and small incremental change. The "drop out of the system" ssolution, in my view, leaves the system entirely int he hasnds of those who choose to play it.

Not always a good thing.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 03:19 PM

The world is a lot safer than when the cold war ended. Certainly the US is much safer from outside aggression. The Russians and Chinese are getting too fat and happy to go to war. The reserve is not nearly large enough to see us through an oil embargo. There is no one who can invade us. Other grades are just as useful to the military as light sweet crude, and releasing the light sweet crude will do more to lower todays oil prices than a gas tax holiday or freeing up more oil leases.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 03:25 PM

Agreed, Little Hawk. And it is the US/UK playing American Roulette (cue Robbie Robertson song here!) with Pakistan, India, and Israel--all of whom are volatile nuclear players. It could all go literally up in a mushroom cloud at any time.

Amos, you sound as if you think us schmucks, through voting, has some kind of control over "the system" as it stands.

So far, voting hasn't done anything to either reform the system, or bring about it's demise.

That is because voting is a subterfuge, to protect and insulate the ruling oligarchy from radical change in the system they own and control.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:14 PM

Also, I think Obama capitulating on FISA and environment will have an effect.

Today's news via the latest Zogby poll says:

New poll shows Obama losing support among young, women

By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers

Barack Obama has lost ground among some of his strongest bases of support, including young people, women, Democrats and independents, according to a new ATV/Zogby poll.

The Illinois Democrat has also lost some support among African-Americans and Hispanics, where his lead over Republican John McCain has shrunk, and among Catholics, where he's lost his lead.

The net result, pollster John Zogby found, is a race that's neck and neck, with McCain supported by 42 percent; Obama by 41 percent; Libertarian Bob Barr by 2 percent; and independent Ralph Nader by 2 percent. Another 13 percent supported other candidates or were undedcided.

Zogby called the results a "notable turnaround" from a July survey he did that showed Obama leading by 46-36.

"McCain made signifciant gains at Obama's expense among some of what had been Obama's strongest demographic groups," Zogby said.

His findings:

-Among voters aged 18-29, Obama lost 16 percent and McCain gained 20. Obama still leads, 49-38;

-Among women, McCain gained 10 percentage points. Obama now leads 43-38;

-Among independents, Obama lost an 11 point lead. They're now tied;

-Among Democrats, Obama's support dropped from 83 percent to 74 percent;

-Among Catholics, Obama lost the 11 point lead he had in July and now trails McCain by 15.

Zogby said Obama also lost ground among minorities.

He attributed Obama's erosion of support to McCain's criticisms of Obama as inexperienced in the wake of Obama's trip to Europe, the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq and to Obama's flips on some issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:33 PM

To repeat myself, these flips are going to kill him. Pandering makes him not the new broom, which is what all the excitement was about.

High oil prices are an absolute necessity. They should be far, far higher.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:36 PM

"That is because voting is a subterfuge, to protect and insulate the ruling oligarchy from radical change in the system they own and control."

That, sadly, is the case. When the major political parties are all simply compliant puppets of a ruling imperial order, then voting becomes a mere subterfuge. It becomes a rubber stamp.

And they are all simply compliant puppets. This is true in the USA, in the UK, in Canada, and in most other countries as well. It's a game. People play the game not knowing that the game is rigged.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:46 PM

Peter T

He's going to be attacked either way.

I've never heard him say that there was no way he would agree to drill offshore. That's what McCain has been saying about him. What I have heard him do is criticize McCain for saying that his opposition to drilling is the reason for high prices. I've heard him say that we can't drill out way out of the mess we are in. And for gosh sakes! John McCain was actually against Offshore drilling until June 13. He flip flopped for oil company donations. Obama said he would agree to it only as a means of getting more important concessions.


The so called liberal media gives McCain a pass and says Obama has flip flopped. what are ya gonna do?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:49 PM

FUnny...on the Pop Views of Obama thread, I think, I posted ap oll released Tuesday (today) that had him up six points over McCain. SIgh. WHat paper d'ye read?



A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:11 PM

You can find all the major polls here.

Realclear polls.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:23 PM

The McCan't energy speech is delivered in Michigan today.
He wants more nuke plants and drilling.



Newseek Aug.
"France has had 923 nuclear "incidents involving their nuclear power plants and breeder reactors this year alone."

It must be hard for McCain to point to France as leaders in nuclear power.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM

Not only is Obama not ready for primetime but his energy policy amounts to inflating your tires. THis is not tiddlywinks folks.
Obama is like an internet date, once you actually meet him you realize what a big mistake he is.

Gov. Romney Aug. 5th 08

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:55 PM

No, no, when I think of all the nice people I have met at Mudcat through the Internet, I am almost sold on Internet dating!!!

I didn't say Obama wasn't the best bet, I just don't see him as the Second Coming.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:47 PM

I am QUITE sure he is not the Second Coming, PT!!! But compared to the alternatives, we should be treating him as though he were!! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:58 PM

The new sovereignty are not borders as we once knew them, but corporations. Forrest Bush, George 41,'s father opened up China, during the Nixon administration. George 'W', Billy Clinton, Carter, and George (41), have continued on the same path. It does NOT matter what the media
(run and owned by large corporation players)reports, in their coverage,,if you're not part of the 'club' you don't get press, unless its, in belittling, and watered down, coverage....and very little air time, during the debates, as not to let your voice be heard. Obama and McCain are cut from the same fabric, though hidden from the public. McCain has one main CFR adviser, while Obama has six. Bob Barr, who probably has the most integrity of the lot, gets hardly any coverage. For years I've said,(and Jesse Ventura has echoed this recently), that 'they should provide a box on the ballot, saying 'None of the above'. That way we could show a 'non-confidence' vote, but show we are still willing to participate....By the way, during the Nixon election, 'Mickey Mouse' received a quarter of a million 'write in' votes!. Now with the ballot system, presently in place, there is nowhere to 'write in' a candidate. As I have said, for quite some time now, this 'election' is a major farce, perpetrated on the American public, to whoop up emotional support, over candidates, who offer so very little other than blab!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:59 PM

Months ago I did a humorous post of a series of miraculous events that all pointed to a second coming.

We all know what happens if you say you are more popular than Christ but suppose you could suspend belief for a moment and imagine that "he" really is the ...









George W Bush that is ;~}

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:06 PM

Both McCain and Obama see nuclear as part of the energy mix. Their major difference is that Obama doesn't talk about McCain's position.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:10 PM

LOL

>>Forrest Bush, George 41,'s father opened up China, during the Nixon administration.

Was he a politician? Did people yell "Run Forrest Run!" at the campaign rallies?


(Prescott)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:14 PM

"Their major difference is that Obama doesn't talk about McCain's position."...Well that changes everything!!..I guess he gets my vote!!.......................(Not!)
There's a lot of things Obama isn't talking about! But really, does it matter??..Its all talk..talk is cheap..and both have them have been bought at bargain prices.
Do you really think these guys represent you???

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:40 PM

George W. (actually his speechwriters) said at one of the White House Dinner Suck-up Events that Pamela Anderson and Mitt Romney had both been invited, and were sitting in the same room, and that he was pretty sure that he had read somewhere that that was one of the signs of the impending Apocalypse.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Ween Addict
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 08:14 PM

Well interesting speech...though what would have sold me was the mention of a "feed in tariff law" instead of just tax credits. I wonder how many people on this site even know what a feed in tariff law is, well without googling it at this point that is. If ya don't google it, its worth knowing about. Its probably one of the most proven and viable models for deploying renewable energies. Now that would have been an bold and impressive statement..at least in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:25 PM

Great post..BUT....who's going to pay for all that national upgrading??..Being as he wants huge tax increases, to redistribute money, are you going to have any left??? Even worse, after the 'election' the plan is to devalue the dollar, drastically, no matter who wins. ..Another 'pie in the sky', get all emotional, dribble!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:22 PM

If building is to occur in any event, it is wasy to see that efficient buildings are actually cheaper to build. One example is to virtually never bend ducting and pipes which is cheaper to do in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:43 PM

>>Hey what happen to my posts other 2 posts? ;(
Friendly heads up!
If you don't say who you are you might lose that one.

---

To the anonymous poster who had three posts deleted, please note that anonymous posting is no longer allowed at Mudcat. Use a consistent name [in the 'from' box] when you post, or your messages are deleted.
Thanks.
**Forum Moderator**

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:11 AM

As for who foots the bill of the national upgrades thats a BIG question and a BIG answer and I won't lie im not an economist but i doubt anyone here is one either..well maybe but im sure they don't balance the national budget, elect me president i figure it out though i swear ;)..anyways its not like we are a poor country, it would seem plausible that the government could find the money for this, hell they managed to find 400 billion dollars or so for Iraq....anyways Lets take a look at somethings i do know. First improving building energy efficiency. Its economically sound to build efficiently right now! incentives or not (there are incentives in place at the moment, better mortage rates, rebates on things..tax credits)..so why isn't it a more profound trend? Thats a answer ive been putting together for awhile now. The only reason i can see is that ITS NOT IN THE BUILDING CODES!!!!! Its as simples as that..The technology,mehtods, and materials are here..they are proven, they are affordable, they are BETTER then the older practices, BUT humans are by nature reactive not proactive at least a majority are, now that includes contractors too. Why the hell would they change anything unless they had to? The construction business runs as many other archaic-like business models with this motto. If it ain't broke don't fix it...unfortuantely most contractors don't see the way they are building is broken! But sense no one is there to point out how inefficient energy performing structures are a huge problem (in my opinion the root of our problems from a non-transportation energy consumtion crisis)it doesnt change. WHY? Simple..No legistlative body has taken the initiative to improve our building energy codes to the level they need to be for the 21st century) and these practices won't change until a legisaltive body does( be it federal or state)WHY? Cause as i said we are reactive not proactive. EXample: well a question firs... have you been on a construction site lately? Next time you are try this its almost laughable if it wasn't so sad. Ask a architect or contractor about their energy efficiency stratgies for the building..id say 90%(The REACTIVE type)just look at you with a blank stare and say ahh..yeah we got enough insulation in the walls and the house to pass code(unfortuantly this code is not even close to efficient)..thats our strategy, thats all we need to do so thats all we are doing. Now a couple(PROACTIVE) will actually surpise you and say ahh well we have done this this and this above the code and now this home will have 50% less energy useage annual. Why did you do that? Becuase it relates to better marketing abilities of our product blah blah blah..the key here is they are buidling like this not becuase they have to but voluntarily becuase they see it as a marketing advantage, have a very high standard of business ethics,ect. Hence the problem, building energy efficient structures is voluntary..not manditory!..So unless legistlation steps in and improves energy codes to a level we need i don't see how this HUGE problem will be fixed any time soon. So who pays for this "Upgrade". Well truthfully it won't be an upgrade on new construction , new structures are going to be built whether we like it or not..and since building efficiently doesn't necessarily cost more..it just takes better building practices(aka new energy codes instated)there will not really be a need of federal subsides just for new code implementation. Now upgrading existing homes..well that will need incentives most likely but as i stated above i don't balance the budget so i have not exact answer, but ill say this improving efficiency in existing homes is not horribly expensive, a simple energy audit, which many utility companies will do for free can save lots of energy..unfortuantlay again it is voluntary and not mandatory and unfortuantly not only are we reactive we are freaking LAZY as americans so even though its out there and alot of times free most people just don't do it..a true shame. Solution..pass legistaltion that says utility companies are required to do an energy audit on the structures of existing or new customers..either in-house or contracted out..it is in the utility companies best interest to do it anyways and that is why most offer the service for free or at discount prices right now. whew that was long...sorry if i repeated and ranted but there is a lot to it..that was just the tip of the iceburg on how to implement something like that, didn't even get into the methods, techologies, or real meat of the subject but that would be a book in itself. Any ways will obama or mccain do this..well..thats the big question i guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:28 AM

Well something to add on i was just thinking about..why aren't energy codes as much of a priority or as strict as say structual codes? or electrical codes? or plumbing codes? Well I had a little help on this one, but the simplest answer is cause they can't kill you if they fail! Sorry Joe, you used so much energy that your house lost all magnetic structural integrity and collapsed upon itself...oh and it created a black hole which is slowly..well... consuming the rest of the neighborhood. Ahh better call your homeowners association..uhmm you are insured right? WRONG! LUDICRIOUS! WOULD NEVER HAPPEN! OR SO ONE WOULD THINK..That black hole is starting to seem less and less ludicrious in a strange bizzaro world kind of way..now that IS laughable.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:14 AM

Well i might have made things sound a bit to simple, there will be a cost to state, local, or federal government in the efforts to enforce these codes. Seems the problem is the resources aren't in place at the moment to ensure these codes are being properly implemented. So coin would have to be spent to hire and train more inspectors and im sure cerftification seminars would need to be developed for properly interpeting and implementing energy codes will need to be given to practicing contractors and new contractor liscenesing tests for those entering the industry. But hey thats the price for continuing to do business in a certification/licscence type industry..Its not really a big deal truthfully, it happens all the time already with re-certification liscened contractors need to get on different yearly type schedules. So necessarliy free but the energy and $$ that could be saved to both the owners of these structures and state and local governments on energy bills would probably far outway the cost then again thats just speculations but im sure someones doing studies on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:24 AM

I think the biggest problem keeping people from driving small cars -- and most only drive themselves shorter distances -- is not a desire for status or luxury but simple safety, especially for their children. We need alternate road systems where only smaller lighter vehicles at lower speeds..sharing perhaps with bicycles etc.. are going. So you would only crash with each other and not a Greyhound bus. We also need trains that would pull cars like ski ropes and you get off at your destination. or maybe like putting your car onthe ferry, something like that but for highways. I take the bus and walk now but I would be a perfect candidate for a smart car or a zebra or something..except the winds here would probably blow it off the road. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:44 AM

"Great post..BUT....who's going to pay for all that national upgrading"

It pays for itself,,,in time. Green Buildings, a nice post on it above, is far from complete when you take into consideration the building's footprint when using recylced or new composite materials, the diastanse they travel from manufactured site to job site. Buildings can now be built to be completely self sufficent energywise. And yes the building code are in bad need of updating the present techology hasn't even made it to print yet.




"The people who can AFFORD to buy a hybrid don't need the rebate, the people who CAN'T AFFORD A NEW CAR AT ALL need a rebate"

Well, my mother bought a Prius & so did I. Neither of us can be considered to belong to the middle class anymore. We are those people you say can't afford a new car! I'm no better off than a church mouse but I was able to buy one at $23,000 a year & a half ago. I've put on well over 100,000 miles & figure I've saved more than $4,000 in gas as appose to someting that woud've gotten half what I get now. I get generally between 45 & 50 mpg never worst sometimes better. I got a rebate of just over $2000 which was very helpful. I haven't bought an American vechicle in decades because the US auto manufactures continue to push the big gas drinkers. It's only now that the bastards are offering any sort of semi alt. They could've helped starting back in the 60's, it's no wonder they're hurting & crying now & Honda & Toyota are at the top.

   "Democrat Barack Obama called today for tapping the nation's strategic oil reserves to help drive down gasoline prices, a shift from his previous position on the issue. The reversal is the second refinement in Obama's energy policy...."

I'd rather have a president that's not for keeping us at war for the next 100yrs or bring us into a new one & who'd at least not use the excuse of a future war as a reason not to release the reserves now.


"The strategic oil reserves are there for a good reason: we may be attacked again and find ourselves at war. In some cases we paid more for that oil than market value because it was considerd necessary. Leave it where it is."

Hopefully we won't have a president in offce that feels that war is fis 1st choice. I also don't think that the reserves were bpought close to the present day price.


There's quite a difference between Obama & MaCain. MaCain would continue the present war until victory is attained no matter the cost or time & he wouldn't think twice about using war as a settling point with other nations if HE see's fit. MaCain doesn't care a hoot about the enviorment as can be seen by his energy policy & the only green he cares about is in dollars. MaCain carries the banner of Reagan & the Bushes high & will support the right of might & the mighty corporation. MaCain also thinks highly of the right to Government to ride rough shod over our human & civil rights in times of fear & he knows how to keep fear in the forefront & wave it in our faces like a bloody cross. On the other hand I've seen enough about Obama to believe he's all fo what MaCain isn't & that plenty enough reason for me to give my vote for him.

While I'm at it, if you don't plan on voting you have no right to squaking now or after. When my children turned of age they even knew it's one of their rights that they needed to excersize. It's unthinkable that one has this opportunity when so many die for it in other countries.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 08:04 AM

Sorry Barry, but if you can afford a new car at all, much less an expensive Prius, you are middle class.

I too am middle class, and have never owned a new car in my life.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:12 AM

Quick question, how much would the monthly car payment be for a new hybrid with the 7,000 dollar rebate taken out? You can do an easy spread sheet and see what the cost comparison would be between the hybrid(40+ miles/gallon) total monthly or annual costs (car payment + gas costs) vs. a cheaper used car's($10,000 and lower @ 30gallons/mile and lower) total monlthy or annual costs (car payment + gas costs). Damn Ill can whip out a graph in about 10 15 minutes if someone can supply the monthly payment cost, or just the typical interest rate and lenght of the loan that is standard today for car loans. That should sheed some light on whether or not this is feasible..numbers don't lie ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:27 AM

"We don't know what a hitch ball is. Anybody know?" A cameraman politely explained that it's the silver thing on the back of a truck used to tow a trailer. "Oh, I see," Obama said,

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:34 AM

Thanks for that tidbit GUEST,Sawzaw. That ain't gonna help sell the Obama product out here in rural America.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:34 AM

"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed," Obama told a crowd in Richmond on Tuesday

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:46 AM

Seriously, Obama didn't know what the trailer hitch was?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:46 AM

That one smells to high heaven, Sawz.

Even money it's a mashup.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:53 AM

I've owned and used ball hitches on and off for thirty years and this is the first time I've heard or seen the term "hitch ball" last time I bought one, I called it a ball for my trailer hitch and low and behold, the dude knew enough to sell me one.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 11:00 AM

Ah, I didn't get what was going on at first. The out of context snippets attacks!

Nice job Sawzaw. See if you can find one where he says under wear,

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:21 PM

Please be informed that criticism is not an attack.

Insecure people claim that least bit of questioning or challenging of their positions, convictions or knowledge is an attack.

The guy did not know what a hitch ball was. What context should that be put in to excuse his naïveté?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:39 PM

Taking a sentence or two out of context to try to pretend that someone is stupid is not criticism. Its playground teasing.

Grow up.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:54 PM

It isn't about Obama being stupid, it is about him being an elitist, college lecturing city boy, I believe. Or at least, that is what the McCain camp would likely have to say about it.

Wait--isn't he supposed to be Kansas stock?

Is there someone in Kansas who doesn't know what a 'hitch ball' (or as we call it around my parts, a 'ball hitch') is?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Peace
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:59 PM

That reminds me of a good joke.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:03 PM

"it is about him being an elitist, college lecturing city boy"


YIKES!!! God forbid that that should happen!

"Oh, where are my homespun 'just plain folks' credentials when I need them? Why couldn't I have grown up in a log cabin, chawin' on a grass stem and cleanin' my daddy's old shootin' iron?"   (sob! sob!) "Hey, but watch this!" (shoots a few baskets...and every one of them is a 'swish')

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:06 PM

Elitist be damned!!

I'm with John Stewart!

This is the kind of President I want!!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:15 PM

Are you kidding, Jack? When you could have this instead?

The Dream Team

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:15 PM

The fact that he may not have had occasion to use a ball-type trailer-hitch does not mean he can't handle a dry-balled Has-Been.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,DV
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:21 PM

Good one, Amos!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:41 PM

So can whats the monthly cost(car payment + gas bill) of say a new hybrid with this $7000 dollar rebate compared to a say coventional, cheaper used car?

Well heres what i came up with:

A $22,000 dollar hybrid with the $7000 rebate is a $15,000 car loan.
At 10% APR on the loan for 5 years is $318/month. Now say this car gets 50miles/gallon and has an annual mileage of 15,000 miles which is 1250 miles a month and 25 gallons of gas a month.
Say an average of $4/gallon that $100 a month in gas bill + the car payment for a average grand total of ...$418/month.

A $10,000 car loan for a conventional vehicle at 10 APR for 5 years is $212/month. SAy this car gets 25miles/gallon and has an annual mileage of 15,000 miles which is 1250 miles a month and 50 gallons of gas a month. Again an average of $4/gallon so thats $200 a month in gas bill + car payment for a averagen grand total of....$412/month.

Ahh a $6 dollar difference...thats pretty damn good

But how about for a say 7,000 car loan for a conventional vehicle at all the same variables as the 10,000 car. That would be total average montly payment (gas+loan) of .....$348/month

Hmm..thats what a $70/month difference between a brand new hybrid and a 7,000 used car. That doesn't sound to bad at all.

So can lower income people afford a hybrid vehicle with this rebate? Seems its feasible.

Now a million hybrid cars at $7,000rebate/car..well that 7 billion dollars in incentives.

In terms of gas savings and this is im sure not the most acurate statistics lets say 25miles/gallon for conventional and 50m/g for hybrid, with an average of 15,000 miles/car traveled annually.

So thats 300 gallons/car saved annually, which relates to about 300,000,000 gallons of gas for 1 million hybrids saved annually...at 42gallons/barrel so thats about 7,200,000 barrels of gas we don't have to import annually at $120/barrel...which is about $864,000,000 a year saved on import costs. so how many years will it take to pay off the initial 7 billion dollars in incentives? well that less then 10 years...so if you put 100,000 new hyrids with this incentive on the road every year there would be a net cost of $0 dollars over a 10 year period due to the savings in buying oil from another country and keeping that cash in our own economy and auto industry..sounds like a sound plan to me..ahh whats a better idea then giving american owned auto companines and employees the coin or give it to middle eastern royal families so they can buy another 1,000 jets and make more ridicuioulsy lavish palaces..hmmm?

Well to me the numbers seem to work but maybe its over simplified, but its not that oversimplied i mean when you do LCC(life cycle costs) you really need to but inflation and a few other numbers into the equations but this is just a pretty close approximation. Maybe i missed something though check the math and critiqueif ya like.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:01 PM

Environmental impact of making the battaries for the hybrids, and disposing of them after end-of-life? (vs impact of "normal" 12v car battary)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:07 PM

I think you mean recycling them at end of life. BEar in mind, with the right impetus this is a technology which will ramp DOWN in total cost per watthour delivered. For example, just over the horizon is an efficient fuel-cell-recharge system based on solar.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:20 PM

Battery recycling is a not something we need to invent, we do it right now!..Its not like inventing cold fusion...in fact in line with this idea of recycling is another huge challenge that most be meet in the coming years by industrial/product designer and manufacturers to begin as McDonough calls it the "NEXT INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION". The ability to design products that are completely recyclable from start to finish...trying reading cradle to cradle by McD. its a very interesting understanding of the movement manufacturers and designers must beging to implement as world resources are depleted. as well as what to do with manufacturing wastestreams and how to make them cyclic so what is old and worn and considered "waste" becomes the feedstock for the process again. Changing our mentality of linear products to cyclic products. A cost effective business model as well so its not just morally smart, also economically smart. But this must start at manufacturing and feedstock procurment levels...the responsiblity can not be left completey up to the consumer end of the spectrum...this idea of recycling we have at the moment is completely wack! you can't start recycling at the end of the process(the consumer end) you must begin at the beginning for it to truely work.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:28 PM

And the $7000 comes from thin air or does it get added to the national deficit?

Heavy Lead acid batteries are used in the current generation of hybrids.

When lithium batteries can be used, there will be a whole new generation of hybrids, superior to anything we have now.

Why doesn't the brilliant Mr Obama subsidize development of lithium batteries for hybrids?

Lithium Nickel Manganese Oxide Battery Promising For Hybrids

An MIT team has made an important advance in battery technology for hybrid vehicles.
    Researchers at MIT have developed a new type of lithium battery that could become a cheaper alternative to the batteries that now power hybrid electric cars.
    Until now, lithium batteries have not had the rapid charging capability or safety level needed for use in cars. Hybrid cars now run on nickel metal hydride batteries, which power an electric motor and can rapidly recharge while the car is decelerating or standing still.
    But lithium nickel manganese oxide, described in a paper to be published in Science on Feb. 17, could revolutionize the hybrid car industry -- a sector that has "enormous growth potential," says Gerbrand Ceder, MIT professor of materials science and engineering, who led the project.
    "The writing is on the wall. It's clearly happening," said Ceder, who said that a couple of companies are already interested in licensing the new lithium battery technology.

Their success came from making the material have a more crystalline structure.
    Lithium ions carry the battery's charge, so to maximize the speed at which the battery can charge and discharge, the researchers designed and synthesized a material with a very ordered crystalline structure, allowing lithium ions to freely flow between the metal layers.

The battery still costs too much to manufacture.

    A battery made from the new material can charge or discharge in about 10 minutes -- about 10 times faster than the unmodified lithium nickel manganese oxide. That brings it much closer to the timeframe needed for hybrid car batteries, Ceder said.
    Before the material can be used commercially, the manufacturing process needs to be made less expensive, and a few other modifications will likely be necessary, Ceder said.

"The most promising ways to reduce gasoline consumption quickly is through hybrid vehicles. Hybrid vehicles have both a gasoline-powered engine and an electric battery based on technologies that were developed by the Department of Energy. In other words, this technology came to be because the federal government made a research commitment. That's why I think it's double -- important to double research as we go down the next decade. The gasoline engine charges the battery, which helps drive the vehicle. And the twin sources of power allow hybrid cars and trucks to travel about twice as far on a gallon of fuel as gasoline-only vehicles. That is a good start when something that can go twice as far on a gallon of gasoline than the conventional vehicle can.

Hybrid vehicles are a good deal for consumers and the American people are figuring it out. More than 200,000 hybrids were sold in the United States last year -- the highest sales on record. There's growing demand for hybrid automobiles. And working with the Congress, we came up with an additional incentive, and that is we provide a tax credit up to $3,400 per hybrid vehicle purchaser. In other words, we want to stimulate demand. In the marketplace when there is demand, suppliers will meet that demand, and that's positive, because if you can go twice as far on a gallon of gasoline than otherwise it means we're becoming less dependent on oil. Hybrid vehicles on the road today are delivering impressive gasoline savings.

But there is more to be done, and that's why I'm here at Johnson Controls, because engineers here are working on ways to replace the current hybrid battery technology with advanced lithium ion batteries that are now used in cell phones and laptops. These batteries are lighter, they are more powerful, and they can be recharged quickly. Using new lithium ion batteries, engineers will be able to design the next generation of hybrid vehicles, called plug-in hybrids, that can be recharged through a standard electrical outlet. Start picturing what I'm talking about: you've got your car, you pull in, you plug it right in the wall."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:31 PM

Ahh just a little something to add about recycling batteries at the moment we recycle 98% of lead-acid batteries in the US..98%! unfortuantly consumer electornic batteries (the nickle -cadium type) is not so good and that is probably becuase they cost so little and are so small ;) we consumers don't seem to pay attention to small things we throw out into the garabage which makes it to the land fill which creates bad leche water or however you spell that. Now if your talking about hybrid batteries for cars ..ahh those are not little cheap batteries..if you know someone who is just throwing them out please let me know id be happy to take them off their hands..for FREE!!!! Seriously! Ill go cross-state for them ;)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:40 PM

Thin air..ahh where does any money the government spend come from? There is a federal budget correct? That is made up of our taxes correct? Im being serious im not to up to par on how federal money is spent or where it comes from..Ahh i know the governement borrows money as well...well who we borrowing from ? China? Well my question is how did we get all this money for Iraq..or the space program, or any freaking thing the government spends on? from thin air? Seriously i really want to know why everyone says where ya gonna get the money thin air? Is our federal government on welfare? Is it flat broke? Or is that up to politicians in charge to decide where federal money goes and how much?

Damn i keep forgetting to but a from: name that so damn annoying.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:42 PM

Environmental impact of making the battaries for the hybrids, and disposing of them after end-of-life? (vs impact of "normal" 12v car battary)

If you are talking about a Prius or a Ford Escape Hybrid, I think they are about the same, maybe a little higher for the Hybrid. The hybrid saves gas by shutting off the engine when not in use, and because an electric drive train is way more efficient than an internal combustion one the IC motor is used for bursts of power and charging the battery. Some hybrids reclaim energy in breaking.

Now a PLUGin hybrid would require a lot more battery power, but they get 150 mpg so WeenAddicts numbers would be much better.

A totally electric car would mean no barrels of imported oil. But would require even more battery power and thus the environmental cost of the batteries might be a consideration.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:45 PM

>>Why doesn't the brilliant Mr Obama subsidize development of lithium batteries for hybrids?

You mean, like McCain, offering to give a 300 million dollar prize for research that would happen anyway?

My guess is because he is not an idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:52 PM

Sawz:

I think Mister Obama covered that in his speech (incentivizing R&D). Why don't you read first and THEN comment?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:54 PM

I agree with you Sawzaw we should be putting funds into battery research especially lithum generation 2 batteries, to say that either candidate won't is just being speculative though, you can't make a 30 minutes speech without leaving the smaller exact details out, and im sure there are alot of gaps in both candidates policies at the moment. so come on be realistic now..no one is saying hes brilliant. It seems that people take the candidates to personally instead of looking at the policies first, person second. Will gearing the auto insdustry up for hybrids provide more coin for more battery research?..ahh..i think thats a no brainer..Of course it will! OR did you think that if we push the auto industries to really start producing hybrids they will say "SURE BUT THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL WE ARE GONNA RESEARCH BATTERIES WE ARE GONNA MAKE ELECTRIC VEHICLES WITHOUT BATTERIES? your arguement to increase battery research supports this idea to push for more hybrids..lol..so brilliant no...logical yes...or was that the point you were trying to make but in a round about way?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:56 PM

Paying for the research so that that the resulting products and patents and profits were in public ownership would make sense - but I think it might get frowned on as too socialist. I somehow don't think that's what Sawzaw had in mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:06 PM

Dont say socialist..lol..you might scare everyone! I mean shsss look at what socialism did to europe..well democratic socialism i should say..look at them they are a wreck now ..all united, 35 hour work weeks, all have health care, economy kicking, vacationing in third world countries like the US taking advantage of the poor country's declining dollar...shss what a mess they have become..and all becuase of evil socialism...shame on you europe!...you should go back to imperialism and absolute monarchies..GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!

DAMN IT I DID IT AGAIN WITH THE USER NAME!!! Sorry folks :)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:16 PM

The research for batteries is being done. We don't need to pay for it. If we subsidize the cars and infrastructure, we can rely on competition to make the best car. There are a lot of interesting technologies other than a specific type of battery. Look up supercapicitors.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:26 PM

Oh SawZaw i re-read what i wrote about the $7000 rebate and where the money would come from ..uhmm im not positive on this but i believe the US as a country buys oil from the market, though i could be wrong...so in the federal budget there is an allowance for our oil import purchases. So if you don't spend $864,000,000 in a year for that oil, you can spend it on 864,000,000 for the rebates for the hybrids..ahh someone correct me if im wrong about this im not sure exactly how the US purchases oil..is it done by the federal budget? Is it done by the states? or is that say exxon buys so much gas from what ever producing country there is then sells it to the distrubutors in the state which in turn sell it to your local gas station which in turns sells it to you? anyone got a grasp on how this stuff works?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:44 PM

basically..

The oil companies buy the oil, refine it, then sell it to distributors who sell it to us. Various governments tax these transactions.

Less oil being sold will mean less revenue for government.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:51 PM

"Like George Bush and Dick Cheney before him, he sees more drilling as the answer to all of our energy problems"

And Mr Obama like Bill Clinton and the demoratic before him thinks drilling is not the answer, blocked drilling and created the current crisis.

"he's actually proposed giving $4 billion more in tax breaks to the biggest oil companies in America - including $1.2 billion to Exxon-Mobil."

He is referring to an income tax reduction for all corporations to reverse the flow of companies moving offshore and taking their jobs and profits with them.

"This is a corporation that just recorded the largest profit in the history of the United States."

There has to be a biggest everything. Should the biggest whatever be attacked because it is the biggest? How about the $700B going overseas every year? Mostly oil. The more oil we produce here, the less money will flow overseas.

All this is election year rhetoric.

Who is saying we shouldn't develop solar, wind (except Kerry) nuclear (except Obama) and hydro energy? The drilling is a tide me over intil the they can come online. The 3% number is misleading. America is not comsuming 25% of the world's oil reserves and comparing comsumption to reserves is false logic.

The U.S. has an "estimated 116.4 billion barrels of recoverable oil, enough to produce gasoline for more than 60 million cars and fuel oil for 3.2 million households for 60 years."

This is true except that there are 244 million vehicles on the road and it would be a 15 year supply.

"We simply cannot pretend, as Senator McCain does, that we can drill our way out of this problem."

Mr Obama is pretending that McCain says we can drill our way out of this problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 05:56 PM

It's standard procedure in both politics and Internet discussions to pretend that the other guy is saying and thinking all the stupid things you would want him to say and think in order to make you look better than him. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: DougR
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:01 PM

Not sure if folks here are aware of it, but if you send a $25 to the McCain campaign, you will receive back a device to measure the amount of air in your tires. The tire gauge even has Obama's name on it!

Obama's statement that were Americans to keep their cars tuned up, and operate their cars with the proper amount of air in the tires, the savings in oil would be greater than drilling for oil off-shore, in Anwar, and mining coal shale in the western states is about the silliest thing I've ever heard. I'm surprised more of you don't agree. That's a pretty stooopid statement.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:03 PM

Sawz:

In Obama's energy speech he made very clear statements about nuclear wich give the lie to your remarks on this topic. Why not READ first and THEN comment?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:10 PM

You may think its silly, but this much is absolutely true.

>>>Obama's statement that were Americans to keep their cars tuned up, and operate their cars with the proper amount of air in the tires, the savings in oil would be greater than drilling for oil off-shore, (and) in Anwar<<


I've seen the math, its pretty basic.

I think he actually got the figures on the savings from those left wing tree huggers at NASCAR. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:12 PM

It's a war of giving perspective.

Think of it as an illustration of how little oil is in ANWAR and yet to be drilled offshore.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 06:28 PM

So Doug, do you think it's silly because you don't think it's true? Or do you think that, even though it's true, it's silly because Obama said it?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:00 PM

"Even Texas oilman Boone Pickens, who's calling for major new investments in alternative energy, has said, "this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of.""

Boone: I say east, west coast and ANWR—get it all! To get off of foreign oil, that is the enemy...You're drilling and whatever you are able to find and put into the domestic system will help us."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:06 PM

>>>"Even Texas oilman Boone Pickens, who's calling for major new investments in alternative energy, has said, "this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of.""

Boone: I say east, west coast and ANWR—get it all! To get off of foreign oil, that is the enemy...You're drilling and whatever you are able to find and put into the domestic system will help us."<<<

Yes he said both things.

He's saying that It won't be enough to solve the problem but that we should get it anyway.

McCain is saying that if Obama wasn't against offshore drilling we wouldn't have a problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:09 PM

I think the fact that McCain supporters are willing to spend $25 for a tire gouge gauge that can be purchased for a couple of dollars from Walmart says a lot about what they expect from him as president.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:10 PM

Thks Sailor I figured it would be that for sale to the public, but what about goervnment vechiles? The government must have an allowance for fueling state and federal vehicles within their fiscal budgets..i wonder how much of the budget goes to that? and how much could be freeded up by changing government vehicles to plug/hybrid/electrics, and if by freeing up these cost in gas purchases they could in say a 10 year time replace all their vehicles and there for have cut their budget serverally and could now put that coin to someplace else (say solar recharing stations..and therefore reduce their need to purchase energy even more). would be some interesting numbers to run

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:15 PM

PS.. DougR..how much have you looked into oil shale technology? Don't know much about it myself, you got any good sites talking about the advances being made in it?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:16 PM

Ween

Right now, the extra cost of a hybrid does not pay for the gas you save on any model I know of. So there would be no direct savings. But there would be savings to the environment and to the general economy if the price of gas went down.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:18 PM

Oil shale costs a lot to mine and refine and its extraction produces a lot of carbon dioxide.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,WeenAddict
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:22 PM

My brain has begun to hurt thank you all very much.. ;P

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:30 PM

GUEST,WeenAddict :

If you go to a thread where "Q" has posted and click on his Mudcat name, you will find a record of all his posts. There is a thread that went until about JUL 3 intitled "Oil Shales" and he covers a lot in it. Threads can also be found using dates ...... and 3 JUL 2008 is a known date for that thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 07:59 PM

Doug ........ typical conservative knee jerk reaction ....... if it sounds stupid to you, it must be stupid, no matter what the truth of it is ........ this is what makes me crazy with you all. You make up your mind, and then look for cliche's which support your feelings and biases.

The U.S. Department of Energy says that American's waste 3.56 million gallons of gas or $14.2 million in gas a day at $4 a gallon due to tire pressure. HERE is an article in a business blog that adds it up for you. Read it for comprehension.

Stoopid Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 06 Aug 08 - 08:41 PM

Up until the gas prices sky-rocketed most clear thinking people opposed offshore drilling in the Gulf of Texas & other places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, mainly for enviormental reasons but also it was logicical not to, the returns weren't worth it & it's gain wasn't going to help the present situation & in the long run there wasn't a good enough reson to up set the enviorment. Its a poor statment that we are the one's who "Flip Flop" so easily when it comes down to our own pockets. The prices of fuel goes up & "we the people" are willing to back down in panic & for go our future enviormental concerns for a present day gas crisis, how impulsive we are & how well the repubs know it & are willing to take advantage of it. Shame on them & shame on US. Again we have a gas crisis & the War in Iraq takes a back seat, again shame on them & shame on US. Pulling out of a 10 billion a month war would turn around the economy more than drilling oil of pulling politician's teeth! Shame, Shame, Shame. We deserve everything that we ask for, vote for who you will think is best for our future or vote for your own pocketbook, whatever makes you feel best for the moment.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 07:57 AM

Electra magnetism

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:01 PM

Must be a New Age name for what causes girls to fall in love with their fathers subliminally, I guess.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:08 PM

I donno Barry, a few points swing in a poll after all those attack ads doesn't necessarily mean the people are supporting the drilling.

I think its just propaganda from Bush's boys. We have to keep reminding ourselves that he is still there and he his administration has not got any more honest or less sneaky. Remember he has been pushing for offshore drilling since he ran in 2000.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:21 PM

"Look to how the Democratic presidential nominee's agenda now reflects the Bush/Cheney energy agenda. "

McCain claims Obama voted for this ..... while he himself voted against this.

Is this true ... and what's it all about?

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:33 PM

"Look to how the Democratic presidential nominee's agenda now reflects the Bush/Cheney energy agenda. "

McCain claims Obama voted for this ..... while he himself voted against this.

Is this true ... and what's it all about?"

Told you about this the whole time!!! Its a sham!!!!
The 'president' isn't the one in charge!
(See, I am 'sane')

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:43 PM

>>"Look to how the Democratic presidential nominee's agenda now reflects the Bush/Cheney energy agenda. "

McCain claims Obama voted for this ..... while he himself voted against this.

Is this true ... and what's it all about?"

Told you about this the whole time!!! Its a sham!!!!
The 'president' isn't the one in charge!
(See, I am 'sane')<<

Yeah, that proves you are 'sane' alright. Air tight, Iron clad! Just stay away from sharp objects 'til I can get out of the room OK?

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 12:45 PM

But is this true ???

biLL ( a Canadian who is rather getting tired of the big carny election drone south of the border)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 01:15 PM

Is what true?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 01:22 PM

"McCain claims Obama voted for this (the Bush/Cheney Energy Bill) ..... while he himself (McCain) voted against this."

Is the above statement true .... I heard McCain ranting on about this today on CNN.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 01:55 PM

If it came from a candidate, or a lawyer, or a used car salesman, you can bet it isn't true!
\

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 04:25 PM

Hmmmm ... ok Sanity ... then I guess it isn't true.

thanks

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 04:54 PM

Here is my understanding, Obama voted for an energy bill presented by the Republicans in Congress. As usual, it was a compromise bill. Those are all that get passed with the Senate majority at 51-49 and 60 votes being needed to pass anything. Obama voted for it because it contain things that he thought was important.

If you are looking for someone who will never compromise Obama ain't your guy. You need another George W. Bush, who when a law he doesn't like is passed by Congress, adds little statements picking and choosing the parts he is going to obey. Of course that is quite unconstitutional and certainly not what the framers intended. But I digress. If you want a President who at one time or another voted against bills containing almost every plank in his current energy platform, including the most heavily touted proposal, offshore drilling. You need to pick yourself a John McCain. We ought to cut him some slack on the offshore drilling tough. He hasn't been for it for a full two months yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 08:18 PM

Thanks Jack.

One question remains .... "Obama voted for it because it contain things that he thought was important."

do you know what they where?

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 08:28 PM

No I do not know precisely bill, I think there were some renewable energy things. I'm pretty sure part of it was ethanol subsidies, he is a senator from Illinois and there is a lot of corn grown there.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 09:08 PM

Amos is right. Obama did not say he is against nuclear power but he puts a lot of conditions on it.

This is where McCain is getting the Obama said no claim from:

CNN
All the utilities paid fees to the DOE's Nuclear Waste Fund beginning in 1983 under a contract that required the DOE to begin accepting fuel for storage by Jan. 31, 1998. The government didn't meet that deadline and has yet to accept the waste. There is no official date set for opening the Yucca Mountain facility.

The DOE filed its application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its Yucca Mountain repository license just two months ago. Earlier this week, the agency estimated the repository will cost $96.2 billion through 2133, when the repository would be sealed, more than two-thirds over its last estimate in 2001.

With the NRC's review expected to take at least three years, pursuing the license will fall to a new U.S. presidential administration. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., opposes the Yucca Mountain application, while Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., showed his support for the industry by visiting a nuclear power plant earlier this week.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 09:21 PM

Obama needs one of those tire gauges to test his inflated ego.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 09:26 PM

Maybe he could send you one, while he's at it. If yours don't bust from malpractice and overinflation first.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 07 Aug 08 - 09:36 PM

Thanks again Jack .... it makes sense.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:20 AM

200!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:00 PM

200! Brilliant statement. It just sends a thrill up my leg.

More Amos, More.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:13 PM

Obviously you are MUCH more easily amused and thrilled than Chris Matthews. He needs a world-class political reformer with inspired rhetoric. For you, a round number.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:19 PM

No Will To Drill
The Democrats Resist Logic -- and Politics
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, August 8, 2008; Page A17

Let's see: housing meltdown, credit crunch, oil shock not seen since the 1970s. The economy is slowing, unemployment growing and inflation increasing. It's the sixth year of a highly unpopular war, and the president's approval rating is at 30 percent.

The Italian Communist Party could win this election. The American Democratic Party is trying its best to lose it.

Democrats have the advantage on just about every domestic issue from health care to education. However, Americans' greatest concern is the economy, and their greatest economic concern is energy (by a significant margin: 37 percent to 21 percent for inflation). Yet Democrats have gratuitously forfeited the issue of increased drilling for domestic oil and gas. By an overwhelming margin of 2 to 1, Americans want to lift the moratorium preventing drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, thus unlocking vast energy resources shut down for the past 27 years.

Democrats have been adamantly opposed. They say that we cannot drill our way out of the oil crisis. Of course not. But it is equally obvious that we cannot solar or wind or biomass our way out. Does this mean that because any one measure cannot solve a problem, it needs to be rejected?

Barack Obama remains opposed to new offshore drilling (although he now says he would accept a highly restricted version as part of a comprehensive package). Just last week, he claimed that if only Americans would inflate their tires properly and get regular tuneups, "we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling."


This is bizarre. By any reasonable calculation of annual tire-inflation and tuneup savings, the Outer Continental Shelf holds nearly a hundred times as much oil. As for oil shale, also under federal moratorium, after a thousand years of driving with Obama-inflated tires and Obama-tuned engines, we would still have saved an amount equal to only one-fifth the oil shale available in the United States.

But forget the math. Why is this issue either/or? Who's against properly inflated tires? Let's start a national campaign, Cuban-style, with giant venceremos posters lining the highways. ("Inflate your tires. Victory or death!") Why must there be a choice between encouraging conservation and increasing supply? The logical answer is obvious: Do both.

Do everything. Wind and solar. A tire gauge in every mailbox. Hell, a team of oxen for every family (to pull their gasoline-drained SUVs). The consensus in the country, logically unassailable and politically unbeatable, is to do everything possible to both increase supply and reduce demand, because we have a problem that's been killing our economy and threatening our national security. And no one measure is sufficient.

The green fuels the Democrats insist we should be investing in are as yet uneconomical, speculative technologies, still far more expensive than extracted oil and natural gas. We could be decades away. And our economy is teetering. Why would you not drill to provide a steady supply of proven fuels for the next few decades as we make the huge technological and economic transition to renewable energy?

Congressional Democrats demand instead a clampdown on "speculators." The Democrats proposed this a month ago. In the meantime, "speculators" have driven the price down by $25 a barrel. Still want to stop them? In what universe do traders only bet on the price going up?

On Monday, Obama outlined a major plan with mandates and immense government investment in such things as electric cars and renewables. Fine, let's throw a few tens of billions at this and see what sticks. But success will require not just huge amounts of money. It will require equally huge amounts of time and luck.

On the other hand, drilling requires no government program, no newly created bureaucracy, no pie-in-the-sky technologies that no one has yet invented. It requires only one thing, only one act. Lift the moratorium. Private industry will do the rest. And far from draining the treasury, it will replenish it with direct taxes and with the indirect taxes from the thousands of non-subsidized new jobs created.

The problem for the Democrats is that the argument for "do everything" is not rocket science. It is common sense. Which is why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, surveying the political rubble resulting from her insistence on not even permitting drilling to come to a floor vote, has quietly told her members that they can save their skins and vote for drilling when the pre-election Congress convenes next month. Pelosi says she wants to save the planet. Apparently saving her speakership comes first.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:28 PM

Krauthammer speaks with forked tongue, while ignoring the math.

How much oil will off shore drilling bring in to the country in 6 years? None.

How many driver-miles will off-shore drilling power in the next 6 years? None.

If we took the energy, effort and costs and put it into building solar, wind, tidal generators and distribution networks and tooling up for a hybrid industry worth looking up to, how much oil would that bring in in 6 years? None.

How many driver-miles would it power? Hundreds of thousands.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:35 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 12:44 PM

Don't be a total idiot, Amos. ( just to fit in with your typical comment)

The math is, that if we start to drill as soon as possible we will have that oil sooner than if we do not start to drill.

Since all that research and infrostructure development does NOT give us ANY energy at this time (it actually will take energy and funds that could be used to purchase energy NOW), why do you bother to suypport that if you do not support drilling now for future oil?




IMO, we should NOT be using up those oil reserves- we should be buying up all the oil that we can and removing it from the market. THAT would give us an advantage in the long run, by making resources available to the US that the rest of the world did not have, as well as crippling the industrial development of nations that we will be in compition with in the future. But that would likely lead to open warfare, so I will leave it for a Democratic President, as we have done in the past ( See the Truman thread, re FDR and Japan)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 01:19 PM

A know-it-all Enviromentalist pulls his hybrid car up near a farmer who is standing by his cotton field.

City kid starts to expain that we need renewable energy sources and suggests that the farmer grow bent grass.

Farmer replies: "why don't you get bent".

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 01:28 PM

Why do people keep framing it as unwillingness to drill offshore? Oil companies are already allowed to drill offshore, and they're not drilling to capacity in those areas. It's not rocket science to figure out that increasing the area that they can drill in will have no effect whatever on oil prices if they're not already using what they have to capacity.

The oil companies and the Republicans are creating this oil price crisis so they can ram legislation to increase the area where they can drill up the rectums of the voters. Don't fall for it! It only encourages them to fuck us over some more.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 01:32 PM

"Oil companies are already allowed to drill offshore, and they're not drilling to capacity in those areas. It's not rocket science to figure out that increasing the area that they can drill in will have no effect whatever on oil prices if they're not already using what they have to capacity."


Gee! And I thought that it helped to drill where there was oil! We can just drill wherever we like, and it is all the same!


The areas that are prohibited for drilling have known oil reserves, while the other areas have been shown NOT to have oil( in sufficient amounts to justify drilling). Where would YOU be looking to drill?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 02:24 PM

...Maybe in a gas station???

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:19 PM

>>The math is, that if we start to drill as soon as possible we will have that oil sooner than if we do not start to drill.

To paraphrase turdblossom, You have your math I have THE math.

If Congress passes that bill tomorrow. It won't have any net effect for years. The oil companies are drilling now as fast as their resources allow. Even if they get permission, they won't get to those places for years. But you might be thinking, they could divert rigs from the places they are drilling now. That would mean that the would develop the offshore fields faster. Well yes it would, but then we would have to wait longer to see oil from the existing leases.

THE math is that any talk or action the government might take NOW will have no net effect. The prudent course would be for the government to wait until the oil companies were in a position to take advantage of the new leases and put them up for bid then.   


This whole thing is a smoke screne for the Republicans to put the oil leases in the hands of their friends now. Because the Oil companies are donating to Republicans now.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:21 PM

The oil companies are not currently drilling and extracting to capacity in the areas they are allowed to now that have oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:25 PM

Crossposted.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:31 PM

LOL

I just noticed a point in someone's post that I missed before.

If we try to cripple the development in other countries by depriving them of access to oil, they will develop other energy technologies (or be helped by people who will develop other energy technologies) and they will not need oil to develop their countries. And when that happens, the rest of the world will be paying them for their energy technologies and we will be stuck with a lot of oil that we paid for and nobody wants.

It really isn't possible for us to harm others without also harming ourselves. The sooner we understand this, the better our quality of life will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:38 PM

Funny how the oil outfits hold on to those unused leases. insstead of turning them back to the Feds.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:42 PM

Why would this government ever want to go green, why push 'Hybrids', why adopt new building codes that require building to be close to self sustained energy-wise (they use more energy than most), why invest in R&D for more efficent fuel for flight, why require Detroit to go with a public campain aginst their SUV's & bring us up to more reasonable MPH's. Because the benift for using fossil fuels is to great for those that run the nation/corporation to drive down that road. We could've been on that highway back in the 70's but we keep getting derailed by those that profit from the continuios use of fossil fuels. Solar was out in the late 60's with tax incentives & then those incentives were trashed. What's wrong with this picture?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 03:52 PM

CarolC - "It really isn't possible for us to harm others without also harming ourselves. The sooner we understand this, the better our quality of life will be."

Now there is the voice of wisdom. Right on, Carol.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 08:28 PM

Carol..for once, I agree with you! Also, right along with that, if another country develops a new kind of energy, it would probably be a cheaper form, as
I've mentioned in another thread, and profits would cause the oil companies, to lose their grip.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Aug 08 - 10:02 PM

It is wherever the multinational oil companies fear just that, to lose their grip, that you will see institutionalized violence and war. They are not thinking in terms of everyone's well-being, only in terms of their own....as Carol has pointed out, that's a very shortsighted attitude.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 09:31 AM

"How many driver-miles would it power? Hundreds of thousands."

When Amos? How soon?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 01:55 PM

>>From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 09:31 AM
"How many driver-miles would it power? Hundreds of thousands."
When Amos? How soon?<<<

For hybrid cars as one of the options, Now, with about a hundred thousand miles per every two cars sold over the life of the car.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 07:02 PM

We already have hybrid cars, Amos #2, so where it the great revelation at?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 09 Aug 08 - 08:44 PM

Sigh. Cum dunces non disputandim, I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 10 Aug 08 - 04:48 AM

Momma said that if one hybrid car is good, more of them is better.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 12:33 AM

A hybrid car has a motor that burns carbon based fuel and produces CO2. How is that a fix for global warming? It could only slow it down a little at best.

What is Latin for a person so smart that they dosn't have to back up any of his claims?

Amosium inflatus rectum iri?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 01:06 AM

Go news for you...the internal combustion engine is NOT the cause of global warming...In the pacific Ocean, west of South America, the ocean floor is warming, and there are no freeways, expressways, or parking lots down there! This is a natural occurrence. As far as getting cheaper, cleaner fuel, it is Hydrogen/water, and electro-magnetic, however the car, as we know it, would be obsolete, and the internal combustion engine would be 'gone the way of the dinosaur'! Also, there are MAJOR corporations, who don't want that, as well as the 'defense' department.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 02:15 AM

Yes Guest from Sanity, there is no connection between heating the atmosphere and the warming of the oceans. You got me. I was hoping no one would point that out. You got me with the magic energy-less engines too. I forgot about the magic engines that the "oil companies and the 'defense' department were hiding. Good thing you are not using your real name or the economic hitmen would be after you.

Sawzaw, we can't and don't have to stop producing CO2 altogether. We need to cut it to a sustainable rate. In a way you are partly right. Eventually, it will be better to stop producing CO2 at all to use cars. But until that is possible it is better to use hybrids with produce 30% less CO2 or plug in hybrids which can produce 60-70% less CO2 on average.

Momma says polluting less is better than polluting more.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Aug 08 - 09:03 PM

Oh Jack, You must know what I'm referring to then!..I guess it isn't so much a secret then....(wink)

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 09:49 AM

""It's a completely fraudulent argument," he said. "It's misleading. It's snake oil salesmanship of the worst order."

He was talking about the latest smoke screen in the presidential election, the bogus contention that lifting restrictions on offshore oil drilling would somehow, in the foreseeable future, bring down the price of gasoline for American motorists.

This absurd contention is now one of the main issues of the campaign. It's the latest example of a very real fear (that sky-high energy prices will undermine the average family's standard of living) being exploited shamelessly for political purposes.

Senator John McCain told cheering bikers at a giant motorcycle rally in South Dakota: "We're gonna drill offshore! We're gonna drill here, and we're gonna drill now!" He told an audience in Lafayette Hill, Pa.: "We have to drill here and drill now. ... Drill here and drill now."

With Senator McCain and the Republicans painting a false portrait of drilling as a method of relief for today's high prices, and with polls showing the G.O.P. gaining traction on this issue, Senator Barack Obama has eased off his previous opposition to new offshore leases.

And so dies the possibility of the presidential campaign offering any real clarification of this important issue.

As Senator Kerry and many others have pointed out, it would be nearly 10 years before any oil at all would be realized from new offshore leases. So your adorable 7- or 8-year-old would be just about 17 and clamoring for a license when this new oil started coming online.

Maximum capacity from these new leases wouldn't be reached until 2030, when that 7- or 8-year-old is approaching 30, finished with college and graduate school, and very likely married with children.

And even then — after more than two decades and who knows how many graduations, weddings, funerals and family cars — even then, the amount of oil expected to come from these leases would have little or no effect on the price of gasoline at the pump.

Assuming that everything over all those years goes all right, it is estimated that an additional 200,000 barrels of oil a day would come from the additional offshore drilling. That's a tiny share of the world's daily output of 85 million or so barrels.

Here's what the Energy Information Administration, the statistical agency that provides official data for the federal government, had to say about the anticipated additional output from offshore drilling:

"Because oil prices are determined on the international market ... any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."

Did anyone mention that to the bikers who were so fired up by John McCain's "drill here and drill now" mantra? Or to the 63 percent of respondents to an ABC News poll who want the embargo on new offshore drilling to be lifted by the federal government?

I wonder how they would have responded if they had been told that lifting the offshore restrictions would risk serious environmental damage to the U.S. coastline over the next several decades while having no significant effect on the price of gasoline at the pump.

Public officials should be disabusing the electorate of its delusions, not encouraging them. The widespread mistaken notions about the potential impact of offshore drilling on gasoline prices reminds me of the large percentages of Americans who were encouraged to believe, and did believe — erroneously — that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had something to do with the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

I wonder if the electorate will ever wise up. We've known, or should have known, since the 1970s that the day of reckoning on energy would come. The U.S., blessed with so many resources, is no longer blessed with an abundance of oil." Herbert, NYT

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 10:38 AM

And no longer blessed with an abundance on intelligence either.

Fear of the pocketbook strikes again, some folks seem to fear it worst than war & enviormental disaster, strange.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 03:56 PM

Guest,

"100% battery powered cars produce 100% less CO2 so there is even less pollution which is even better."


Where do you get the power to recharge the battery, and what is the efficiancy of that power generation and transmissin to the vehicle?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 04:06 PM

"the bogus contention that lifting restrictions on offshore oil drilling would somehow, in the foreseeable future, bring down the price of gasoline for American motorists."

I got news for you Amos, It already has. Didn't it come through your anti-Bush RSS feeds? Wonder why? maybe the feeds are all biased and negative and that is why you are biased and negative.

Oil prices plummeted

Bush talks drill, oil prices drop

By Bob Parks Thursday, July 17, 2008

    "The argument was if the financial markets believed we could drill
on our land, oil prices would drop. So George Bush took the lead.

    President Bush said Monday afternoon he had ordered a reversal of an executive ban on oil and natural gas drilling in offshore U.S. waters, adding it was now up to Congress to turn his decision into law. "The executive branch's restrictions have been cleared away," said Bush in a news conference, which was broadcast. "Now the ball is squarely in Congress' court."
    And look what happened on Tuesday…

    Oil prices plummeted by the second-largest margin on record Tuesday as investors feared a further decline in U.S. demand after hearing comments from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

    Light, sweet crude fell $6.44 to settle at $138.74 a barrel in trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 04:15 PM

Jesus, Sawz, you are a piece o'work. Anybody can start a fairy tale going and make the markets respond on the investment side on the Stock Exchange.

That has nothing to do with the price of fish or the raw costs of oil.

Let me clarify the position of the opposition: drilling for oil will not effect the real-world supply and demand ratios of oil in any substantive way. Markets will continue to fluctuate on everything from media hype to the dreams of butterflies if they get leaked into the network in the right way. But the core value exchange will not be altered by reason of this drilling.

Betting on futures is a gambling racket, and anyone can manipulate it with a little focused effort, especially with a bully pulpit like the White House.

But the underlying facts of what's available versus what is needed will not be altered. So screw this PR bullshit, pard. It ain't worth the paper it's drawn on.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 04:29 PM

Amos: Here is some more news for you.

Looking at the chart, see how the price of crude took a dive when Bush ended the federal ban on offshore drilling?

The blue line is the price of gas which started dropping a few days later.

Demand for gasoline has been declining all year but it made no difference in the price because oil traders kept bidding up the price of crude.

U.S. oil demand drops in first half of 2008
        
WASHINGTON – U.S. oil demand was significantly down for the first six months of 2008, API said today in its Monthly Statistical Report. While U.S. refiners churned out record and near-record amounts of oil products, imports – especially product imports -- fell substantially.

Deliveries of all oil products – a measure of demand – fell 3.0 percent compared with the same first-half-year period in 2007, with gasoline deliveries slipping 1.7 percent. For the preceding three years, oil demand had essentially held steady.

API statistics manager Ron Planting said, "At 20.08 million barrels per day, total demand was the lowest in five years. And the decline in gasoline demand was the first significant one recorded in 17 years."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 04:42 PM

I just went to check the price of crude on he NYMEX:

                         $113.25

That is much less than the figure stated above and is down $30 or more from peak price in the last few months. Some people claim that half the price (or more) is the result of market manipulation by speculators, hedge fund managers and other "investment types".

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 05:46 PM

You guys are now stating that the reason the price of gas went up was because the market traders were frustrated about drilling locally?

You are missing the point, substituting short term coincidence for the fundamentals and then prancing. Bush's announcement did nothing to change anything except mood. The problem with the fundamentals in petroleum supply is not mood.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Aug 08 - 05:54 PM

Sawzaw,

Cause and effect wizard! If you only pay attention to one side you only get the information from there. While Bush ended an executive order ban that made no difference as long as the law against offshore drilling was in effect, Congress was talking about cracking down on the speculators. Assume that oil traders are at least as smart as you. That shouldn't be difficult to imagine. Which do you think is going to have a greater dampening effect. Half a promise to bring more oil on line in 10-20 years or a promise to burst the bubble in the Market the next time Congress sits.

Take your time and think about this. Keep in mind that it has little to do with trees.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 12:36 AM

'Have you seen Obama's energy speech!'...Naw,.. I just couldn't get the energy...
































'

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 04:18 PM

"market traders were frustrated " ????

You really don't know what determines the price of crude oil do you?

It's a commodity like wheat or corn. A perceived shortage caused byr something like a drought makes the price go higher. A perceived increase in the supply caused by something like abundant rain makes the price go down. If making alcohol from corn is announced, a shortage is anticipated and the price of corn goes up before it is even planted.

Yet you act all pompous about your advanced knowledge on every thing and your superior judgment on everything.

Amos cocks one eyebrow and says "fascinating"

Try this "fascinating" book. It even has an offshore oil platform on the cover

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 05:40 PM

Sawzaw,

Obviously the traders are not dummies. They don't respond to moves that cannot possibly have an effect such as Shrub rescinding his father's executive order. They all know that baby Bush has been for offshore drilling since he came to office they know this because he has said so many many times.

There is nothing pompous about pointing out simple truths to the ignorant. In fact many would consider that a kindness.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 09:09 PM

Sawz:

Bush saying anything at all is not going to have a short-term effect on the actual supply of oil.


That should be obvious even to you.

So it's market opinions or mood, or it is totally coincidental.

But as you refuse to put aside your antagonism and your constant flair for sneers and insults, you and I are done.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Aug 08 - 09:48 PM

A perceived shortage. So really, all that would be necessary to raise the price of oil, would be for the oil companies to not drill at capacity in the areas where they are already allowed, and for the oil companies and the US government and US media to push the idea that the only way to bring the price of oil back down would be to allow the oil companies to drill in areas where they are currently not allowed to.

Exactly what I thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 12:05 AM

"pointing out simple truths to the ignorant. In fact many would consider that a kindness."

That is exactly what I am doing.

The "US media" Are used to either reinforce what the left wing whiners say by exposing the truth that the "government" is suppressing OR to counteract what the left claims by publishing what the "government" wants them to.

So which is it?

Which one of you nattering nabobs of negativity who knows all bout the ups and downs of the crude oil market gas the guts to predict when this temporary drop in the price will end?

Ah don' see no hands up in in tha air.

I predict it will continue until Congress poses continued opposition to offshore drilling.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 12:16 AM

I'm with Amos. You choose to be ignorant. So kindness toward you is wasted. You are arrogant with no excuse to be. Its not amusing.

Goodbye.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:44 PM

"Bush saying anything at all is not going to have a short-term effect on the actual supply of oil."

"That should be obvious even to you"

It is not obvious to the Wall Street Journal:

"President Bush’s pledge to goose U.S. oil production through more offshore drilling did the trick, even without producing an extra drop of oil. The idea, as Mr. Bush said Tuesday, is that markets expecting more oil will also expect lower prices in the future."

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 09:48 PM

"Have you seen Obama's energy speech!"


                      Yes, and it lacks energy!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:22 PM

The US media is corporate owned and, as such, does whatever it perceives to be in its own best interest, whatever that may be. That may be whatever will most favorably impact their bottom line, and it also might be whatever will help them gain more access. But dispensing the truth is not a top consideration.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 01:00 PM

So write and perform music that DOES tell the truth..well, that is if you know it! Was a few years back when the music had more influence than the stupid news!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:52 PM

So you cannot use what the MSM promulgates as proof of anything even when they are telling us how great Obama is.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:13 PM

SOme truths are self-evident. But you have to look first.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 09:19 PM

"The US media is corporate owned and, as such, does whatever it perceives to be in its own best interest, whatever that may be. That may be whatever will most favorably impact their bottom line, and it also might be whatever will help them gain more access. But dispensing the truth is not a top consideration."

So is that a yes or no? It sounds like typical side stepping of a simple question when one wants to be non committal. That way they can say "See I was right" no matter what happens.

"SOme truths are self-evident. But you have to look first."?????????????

Another case of riding the fence on what is truth.

Id disagreeing with someone else's opinion that seeks to deny others their right to opinions is arrogance, so be it.

What amazes me is how quick these experts and authorities with their superior attitudes get hostile and have to resort to personal attacks when criticized.

Finally they have to resort to calling people that disagree with them ignorant.

In short, they can hand it out but they can't take it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 09:26 PM

I tend to not trust anything the MSM says. That's why I look for information I can trust from other sources. But the MSM is favoring McCain in this election cycle, not Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 10:25 PM

Only FOX Snooze!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 10:39 PM

It's not you, Sawz. It's the things you say. It may not be ignorance at all, just lousy communication technique.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 11:03 PM

lots besides Fox Are very slanted towards McCain's message, often to the point of communicating them even where he fails to.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 11:55 AM

So the other media outlets besides Fox are neutral?

CHRIS MATTHEWS: I have to tell you, you know, it's part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama's speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often.


Belief Growing That Reporters are Trying to Help Obama Win
Monday, July 21, 2008
Email a Friend Email to a Friend

The idea that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey, taken just before the new controversy involving the New York Times erupted, found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help the Democrat with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 12:14 PM

Yes Sawzaw, that belief is growing, but only because the media is saying that reporters are saying that other reporters are trying to help Obama win. When you actually look at what you are saying and compare any one of these three things, the coverage is slanted toward McCain.

1. Reporters using Republican talking points. (eg. Obama is a flipflopper on Campaign finance and Offshore drilling McCain is never described that way in the MSM. In actual fact McCain flip flopped twice on finance and did exactly the same flip flop on drilling that Obama did a couple of weeks before. These are easy things to keep track of, reporters are well paid and supposedly well educated and smart. They could be fairer, they are not. )
2. Negative things said about each candidate (its two to one in favor of McCain.)
3. Coverage of Gaffes by each candidate. McCain's mistakes get much less coverage.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 12:55 PM

Around 1992 when the mews media were obviously supporting Bill Clinton over George Bush (#41), there was a survey made. Results showed that the Washington media types (magazine, radio, TV and newspaper) were:

               89%   Democrat
                4%   Republican
                7%   "other" (mostly farther Left as Green or unaffiliated Socialist-leaning)

Republicans know this and accept that it ain't going to change any time soon.

Talk shows help level the playing field some, but conservative talk show hosts tell you "up front" what point of they will be supporting, and the listener knows he can turn the show off if not happy. Most reporters, on the other hand, claim to be neutral, but Dan Rather, Mike Wallace, Wolf Blitzer and others obviously are not.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 01:15 PM

I doubt there is any common line of thought amongst the whole class called "reporters".

Besides, the outlets are controlled by editors.

This is just voodoo sociology, IMHO.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 01:20 PM

pdq, that "study" has been disproved so many times and so many ways that it is no more informative than the static on an analog TV, or the shape of a cloud.....

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 16 Aug 08 - 11:16 PM

I think most honest journalists have come to the realization that they are not, and cannot be totally objective on some issues. The good ones say this up front. Mike Wallace, for one, always does.
                Sometimes just the format of the program will tell the viewer/listener where the material is coming from. I don't think anybody expects Rush Limbaugh to be objective.

                When whoever was running Ronald Reagan refused to re-authorize the "Fairness Doctrine," he/she put in motion this hopeless media war we are experiencing now.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 09:07 AM

So if everybody agrees that news outlets are biased one way or the other and that is OK, why is Fox hounded ;D for Supposedly being being pro Mcain Pro Bush etc?

What you are saying is that it is OK for news outlets to be slanted left bot not OK to be slanted right.

Evidently you like the bias and you want all news slanted left.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 09:18 AM

Sawzall - If your comment is addressed to me, I'm not saying that it is "OK" for news outlets to be slanted one way or the other, I'm simply stating--that's the way it is.

                      I would further say that Fox is one of the more honest ones. They make no apologies for being slanted "right." They say they are "fair and balanced," but it's pretty much taken tongue-in-cheek.

                      More troubling to me are outlets like the New York Times, from where so many news stories originate, who would rather cloak their agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 09:32 AM

Whose agenda is that, Rig?

Bill Kristol?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 09:56 AM

" I'm not saying that it is "OK" for news outlets to be slanted one way or the other, I'm simply stating--that's the way it is."

Yes, the Washington politicos in the MSM are 90% or more Left-leaning. Note: that is not a condemnation, just a statemnent of fact. If you poll the independent truckers out here in rural America, you will find them to be 90% conservative and would not vote for the current manufactured immitation presidential product that the Democrats (and their media allies) are trying to sell us. Again, no condemnation real or implied. Just the way is.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 10:00 AM

PDQ:

It is not even a statement of fact; the vast majority of high-profile talking heads on TV are right-ends. The right wing has a much more efficient media network, from Rush to Hannity, to O'Reilly.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 10:07 AM

It's ok to be slanted but it's not ok to misrepresent or lie about what's the truh of what they're reporting on (that's a problem for FOX), they should leave their slant in the alleyway, that is true journalism, as taught in 101. Not matter what a reporter feels they are at least expected to tell the truth, dosen't matter how they feel, that's not part of the picture that they're supposed to be presenting. I don't expect Rush to say a truthful word about anything he has an opinion on.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 10:51 AM

"Whose agenda is that, Rig? Bill Kristol"


                   Well yes, in a sense. If you look at the ownership and the editorial board of the New York Times it all makes sense. Whatever they think is good for Israel is their agenda, regardless of what their lieutnenats appear to advocating to the American public.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 10:52 AM

Rig,

I think you're stretching a bit of a long bow there. But, as they say, chacun a son mauvais gout.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 01:04 PM

Face it, the news industry is not all about news. It's 'infotainment'. Its about making money for the sponsors, who are usually the same ones whose lobbyist, are promoting legislation, that, of course gets on the 'news'(read: advertisements). Notice the ads on the news is always heavily promoting the pharmaceutical companies, for 'illness's' that don't even exist! That's just one.
The other thing about the 'news', is it steers people AWAY from the REAL
issues, that have higher incrimination content, that reveals how bogus our system has gotten, through corruption. Then once in a while we get a political 'sex scandal' thrown at us, to divert us away from the REAL
scandals, and high level crimes, and deterioration of our constitutional rights. then once in a while we get a talk show host, who 'says it all'...and now that 'all' has been said, we feel like 'that because its out there' that its being corrected. WRONG! only YOU feel better(because it was said)..and the slippery slope goes on...while we much on our Fritos and 'enjoy' the news.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 02:10 PM

"But, as they say, chacun a son mauvais gout."


                     Amos - I had to look that up again. It takes longer to respond that way, but it's true, I suppose.


                     But look at Joe Lieberman, he's a good example, and I think there are a lot of Joes in the American press.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 02:14 PM

Well, there's no question in my mind the press has sagged sadly from its once noble purpose in the scheme of the American experiment and has become a laughing shadow of its former self.

Oh, for a Winchell, a Cronkite, a Twain, a Mencken.

And thank goodness for Jon Stewart.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 04:39 PM

Walter Winchell was one of the heroes in Philip Roth's "Plot to Destroy America." I came away from that book with something less than fond feelings for him.


                  I agree with Cronkite, Twain, and Mencken, but will probably reserve judgement on Jon Stewart.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 05:10 PM

One would think that it would be newsworthy if the President of the United States is caught lying about the reason for war on tape.

In the Atta case

John Stewart was the only one who played the tapes. ON ANY US TELEVISION from PBS to To Fox.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 08 - 05:31 PM

John:

When was this tape? I don't recognize the reference.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 11:30 AM

"the bogus contention that lifting restrictions on offshore oil drilling would somehow, in the foreseeable future, bring down the price of gasoline for American motorists"

It is your contention that is bogus. Lifting of the federal restrictions alone has lowered the price of gasoline. Are you a holocaust denier too?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 11:42 AM

"The right wing has a much more efficient media network"

If you want to win, get more efficient that your opposition and quit crying for intervention. He's picking one me. Make him stop. Boo fucking Hoo.

All this crying and victim mentality is precisely why the lefties lose out.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 11:50 AM

Washington Post Ombudsman ( woman) was complaining Sunday about the over-coverage of Obama with respect to McCain.

"Numbers aren't everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates. "


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081503100.html

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 12:39 PM

Thanks for the link Bruce. I just sent this email to Mrs. Howell.

Deborah Howell.

Mr. Hamilton is right you are wrong. But your opinion seems to me the more popular one. When Obama was in Europe several MSNBC shows that I saw gave McCain equal coverage. Obama with Petraus in a helicopter/McCain with Pappy Bush in a golf cart; Obama in front of the bomb and missile casings in Israel/McCain in the food aisle;Obama speaking to 200,000 Germans/ McCain and Lindsey Graham speaking to two or three people in front of a German Restaurant.

Mr McCain was being rewarded for making no effort. Its like the social promotion in the public schools. Mr. McCain is lucky the "liberal media" does not hold him to the standards to which he would hold a schoolchild.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 12:47 PM

>>>Lifting of the federal restrictions alone has lowered the price of gasoline.

Funny, I just heard the President of GE strongly imply that the the drop in oil prices was due to the downturn in the world economy and thus on less speculation. Last week I read the same thing on The Economist" Web Site and on Reuters.com.

At the same time Bush made that announcement. Democratic leaders announced plans to crack down on speculators. Obama talked about releasing oil from the Petroleum reserve.
But somehow Mr. Cause and Effect here is sure its all about Bush finally doing something he was promising to do for seven years.

Momma says that Commodities trader for oil might not be the best career path for you Forrest. Better practice your ping pong.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 12:49 PM

I hope you read the whole article- which gives hard numbers for coverage that put the lie to your comments.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:13 PM

Bruce, obviously you did not read the column. Hamilton said it wasn't about the numbers and I agreed with him. The column "gives lie" to nothing I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:17 PM

"Democrat Barack Obama has had about a 3 to 1 advantage over Republican John McCain in Post Page 1 stories since Obama became his party's presumptive nominee June 4. Obama has generated a lot of news by being the first African American nominee, and he is less well known than McCain -- and therefore there's more to report on. But the disparity is so wide that it doesn't look good.

In overall political stories from June 4 to Friday, Obama dominated by 142 to 96. Obama has been featured in 35 stories on Page 1; McCain has been featured in 13, with three Page 1 references with photos to stories on inside pages. Fifteen stories featured both candidates and were about polls or issues such as terrorism, Social Security and the candidates' agreement on what should be done in Afghanistan.

This dovetails with Obama's dominance in photos, which I pointed out two weeks ago. At that time, it was 122 for Obama and 78 for McCain. Two weeks later, it's 143 to 100, almost the same gap, because editors have run almost the same number of photos -- 21 of Obama and 22 of McCain -- since they realized the disparity. McCain is almost even with Obama in Page 1 photos -- 10 to 9.

This is not just a Post phenomenon. The Project for Excellence in Journalism has been monitoring campaign coverage at an assortment of large and medium-circulation newspapers, broadcast evening and morning news shows, five news Web sites, three major cable news networks, and public radio and other radio outlets. Its latest report, for the week of Aug. 4-10, shows that for the eighth time in nine weeks, Obama received significantly more coverage than McCain. "

.......
"Bill Hamilton, assistant managing editor for politics, thinks that I'm wrong to put weight on numbers. "We make our own decisions about what we consider newsworthy. We are not garment workers measuring our product every day to fulfill somebody's quota. That means as editors we decide what we think is important, because that's what our readers look for us to do -- not to adhere to some arbitrary standard.

"The nomination of the first African American presidential nominee after a bitter primary campaign and his efforts to unite a party afterward were simply more newsworthy than a candidate whose nomination was already assured and who spent much of that time raising money. In the end, we can and should be judged on the fairness of our coverage, but that is a judgment that must be made over the course of the whole campaign, not a single period of time."

Numbers aren't everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates. "

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:18 PM

All the invesment market growth in the next 20 years is expected to come from Asia and not the USA,

so practice your ping pong indeed.

My kids are learning to speak Chinese.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:18 PM

>>>Bill Hamilton, assistant managing editor for politics, thinks that I'm wrong to put weight on numbers.

Bruce at least, read the damn cut and pastes yourself. For most of them that will make one person.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:23 PM

Jack: "Mr. Hamilton is right you are wrong."

""Bill Hamilton, assistant managing editor for politics, thinks that I'm wrong to put weight on numbers."

"The Project for Excellence in Journalism has been monitoring campaign coverage at an assortment of large and medium-circulation newspapers, broadcast evening and morning news shows, five news Web sites, three major cable news networks, and public radio and other radio outlets. Its latest report, for the week of Aug. 4-10, shows that for the eighth time in nine weeks, Obama received significantly more coverage than McCain."

Howell: "Numbers aren't everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates. "

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:32 PM

Obama is getting more coverage because he is making more news Bruce. That is the point I made to Mrs. Howell. But there are plenty of outfits like CNN and NBC which try to balance the coverage. So McCain is getting a free platform without making any effort. How else do you explain the coverage of the German restaurant?

Also you failed to point out that Obama is getting 60-70% negative coverage while McCain id getting 50-55% negative coverage.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:32 PM

..so the major networks elevate to deity the grossest twisters they can find--Hannity, LImbaugh, Coulter, and their ilk.

COmparable coverage, indeed.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 18 Aug 08 - 01:45 PM

Just looking at the numbers tells us nothing.

A related point to Amos' is Hannity, Limbaugh and O'Reilly cover Obama way more than McCain and on any given day 80-90% of their coverage is negative.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 12:18 AM

What about Glenn Beck?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 08:21 AM

Glen Beck?

I don't listen to him much. He seems to complain a lot. Like Limbaugh with better hair?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 11:27 AM

ISn't he a brand of beer?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 02:34 PM

If he was single malt scotch would he be Glenlivid?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM

"Have you seen Obama's energy speech!"


                      I was going to wait until Obama developed some enegy, then I was going to watch it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 05:47 PM

That;s so off the mark it lacks any connection with the real world and therefore has no humor left in it.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 07:48 PM

You mean it had humor once, but now it doesn't?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 07:55 PM

Subject: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 08 - 05:22 PM
____________________


Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM

"Have you seen Obama's energy speech!"


                      I was going to wait until Obama developed some enegy, then I was going to watch it.

______________________

It took 15 days to come up with a joke that lame and you couldn't even spell "energy" when the word was on the page more than 295 times.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 09:37 PM

Jack - That was Ebonics... Oh, no I didn't say that did I? If there was a god I ask forgiveness, but...

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 09:58 PM

God says:

Humm. I'm Thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 10:37 PM

I had a god-father once, when I was knee-high to a grasshopper, whose sense of humour was extraoridnarily vivid and funny. When I tried to tell jokes, being small and unfamiliar with the art, he gave me some sound advice, which, with all due respect and esteem, I pass on to you, Rig:

"Keep on pluggin', son."



A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 19 Aug 08 - 10:47 PM

A word to the wise (guy)

Using ebonics to mock Obama could get you in trouble in a lot of places.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Aug 08 - 07:46 AM

That occurred to me too, Jack. I'm going to have to get in touch with Larry the Cable Guy and figure a way out of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 21 Aug 08 - 02:00 AM

At the same time Bush made that announcement. Democratic leaders announced plans to crack down on speculators. Obama talked about releasing oil from the Petroleum reserve.
But somehow Mr. Cause and Effect here is sure its all about Bush finally doing something he was promising to do for seven years."

July 14, 2008
    Bush "has decided to lift the executive ban on oil exploration in America's Outer Continental Shelf," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told a news briefing. She said Bush would explain the move in a Rose Garden statement at 1:30 p.m..

July 15th
at a news conference, Bush repeated his new position, and slammed the Democratic Congress for not removing the congressional moratorium on the Outer Continental Shelf and elsewhere. Crude-oil futures for August delivery plunged $9.26, or 6.3 percent, almost immediately as Bush was speaking,

July 16, 2008
Oil tumbles again; prices fall over $10 in 2 days Oil prices have settled sharply lower for the second straight day, capping a dizzying drop that has left crude more than $10 cheaper in just two days of frenzied trading. The drop follows a $6.44 sell-off Tuesday, meaning prices have plummeted over $10 since Monday.

22 Jul 2008 ... WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Legislation meant to crack down on oil speculators passed a key test vote in the Senate on Tuesday. ...

August 5 2008
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has called for the US to dip into its strategic oil reserves to lower fuel prices in the short-term. Senator Obama's call, a reversal of his earlier stance, came as he unveiled an energy plan designed, he said, to reduce US dependence on foreign oil.

---

"Democratic leaders announced plans to crack down on speculators."

Monday, July 14, 2008

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, back from the Fourth of July break last week, delivered a typical harangue on Republican obstructionism and Democratic virtue that included a promise: By week's end, he would show Republicans his proposal to deal with "this speculation thing" that he calls the root cause of $4-a-gallon gasoline. It would attempt "to end speculation on the oil markets."

By Friday, Republicans had seen nothing of Reid's plan because of internal Democratic disagreement on details.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 21 Aug 08 - 02:06 AM

June 22 2008

WASHINGTON — Sen. Barack Obama on Sunday said as president he would strengthen government oversight of energy traders he blames in large part for the skyrocketing price of oil.

The Democratic candidate's campaign singled out the so-called "Enron loophole" for allowing speculators to run up the cost of fuel by operating outside federal regulation. Oil closed near $135 a barrel on Friday — almost double the price a year ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Aug 08 - 02:58 AM

Thank's, Mr. cause and effect, you made my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: MaineDog
Date: 21 Aug 08 - 08:15 AM

I wonder if either Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama has studied physics and can explain the relationship between one kilowatt-hour and one horsepower, or knows anything at all about the laws of thermodynamics.
MD

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Alice
Date: 21 Aug 08 - 10:14 AM

T. Boone Pickens was on the Glenn Beck show a couple nights ago, and he got irritated with Beck's sarcastic manner. Beck tends to interrupt people with goofy sarcastic comments. Pickens didn't stand for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Hawkwind
Date: 22 Aug 08 - 02:55 AM

Wow the speech was wonderful, really looks like this guy will be the next president of America. Yes the nation will come together and vote a coloured guy into high office and run America.

Ah, sorry. Neither a coloured guy or a lady were ever in the running for that job.

Why is Hilary Clinton adopting the old Richard Nixon stunt of pointing into the crowd and waving as if it's someone she knew ?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 22 Aug 08 - 10:14 AM

Well, the speech WAS wonderful, yes. And your jaded (and bigoted) remarks are simply untrue . The lady WAS in the running and the "colored guy", as you so gracously put it, is very much in the running.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Stringsinger
Date: 22 Aug 08 - 07:08 PM

Obama could create jobs if: 1. He did what Roosevelt did, put poor people to work for the government on "green" and infrastructure jobs, 2. Cut the FICA payments down for wage earners,3. Get behind the unions because when union membership increases, wages go up and corporations do NOT suffer, 4. Restore Americorps which is our best ambassador
to the world, 5. Observe "cafe standards" in the auto industry, 6. Raise tariffs on foreign
goods to protect American jobs, 6. Streamline the process for the legalization of Mexican workers who work harder than most Americans, 7. Create tax incentives for those who seek job retraining in educational institutions, 8. Get government regulation over those corporations that exploit working people in the US, 9. Insist that the dividend collectors
who sit around on their butts pay their fair share of taxes, and 10. Restore the role of
the working man as America's true hero, not some military general or phony war hero.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Aug 08 - 09:22 AM

"2. Cut the FICA payments down for wage earners,..."

             Obama really makes me nervous, but one of the really good ideas I think he has to to raise the limit on who pays FICA. I think that would do more good than cutting the rate paid by middle class workers.



   "6. Streamline the process for the legalization of Mexican..."

             And that's the major reason Obama makes me nervous. If you want to create work for Americans, why would you bring in more people to compete for American jobs.


                  I agree with your other points, though...

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Hawkwind
Date: 23 Aug 08 - 09:30 AM

Get a grip of yourself Amos and cut the racist comment shit. Christ can you not offer anything else only PC ?

Listen. Neither a woman or a black man will run America. Wise up.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 23 Aug 08 - 10:52 PM

What case Mama?

After 'Bama gave his speech that devastated the oil traders, oil climbed from $135 a barrel to $146 per barrel at the time that Bush announced the lifting of the federal ban where upon it dropped to $128 in 1 week.

If Obma's speech did anything, it raised the price of crude oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Aug 08 - 04:50 AM

If it has Bush's speech only the effect would have been immediate. Do you think that some traders wait a week to read the news? The fact is that there were a whole range of possible causes to the drop in price. Not the least of which was declining demand for oil.

That was the case I had made. In plain English.
By mentioning other causes you made my case.

You really ought to either learn the basics of logical thinking or keep your half baked thoughts to your self.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 24 Aug 08 - 11:50 AM

"Have you seen Obama's energy speech!"


                      It lacked energy!

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 24 Aug 08 - 12:06 PM

I am not sure where the oil price mentioned comes from, but the current one (Friday, Aug. 22) is $114.59. That is down over $30 from the high which was just before the 4th of July. It would be nice to see it drop another $15 in value plus have about a 15% increase in the US dollar's exchange rate. We will never see $2 US gasoline again, but it shoud go slightly below the $3 level, perhaps $2.90 and stay. President McCain will have a federal tax reduction during the peak demand period of summer. That should help keep prices more stabile on a year-round basis. Our $2.90 will still look cheap compared to European prices of $8-10 (that is in US gallons/US dollars). I paid $3.94.9 on friday.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Aug 08 - 12:22 PM

On Saturday I heard the price was over 120 bbl on bad news put of Georgia.

Thank goodness the pander bear McCain will not be president. Because dropping the federal gas tax would be nothing more than a give away to the oil companies.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 24 Aug 08 - 12:24 PM

Senator McCain will certainly support the Obama/Biden tax reform of 2009, I agree--but not as President. I like your numbers, though.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 25 Aug 08 - 10:35 PM

"Do you think that some traders wait a week to read the news? "

That is apparently what you are implyng if you think Obama's "crackdown" on oil traders caused the price of crude to drop while Bush removed the Federal Ban on offshore drilling.

In case you missed it Mama, the price began falling at the time Bush spoke and continued falling to $128 in 1 weeks time.

Crude-oil futures for August delivery plunged $9.26, or 6.3 percent, almost immediately as Bush was speaking,

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Jack The Sailor
Date: 25 Aug 08 - 11:19 PM

Stop trying to prove that you're and idiot.

One speech, a speech announcing something that Bush had been promising for eight years, didn't cause the price to drop steadily for a week. That is absurd. As I said before, demand was dropping at that time, in fact there were several other factors that could have caused the drop. Contributing the drop to Bush's words is just dumb.

Don't try to peddle your faith based economics to me. I'm not going to buy it.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 26 Aug 08 - 09:38 PM

Need new Glasses Mama? It is all here in print but I have to keep relating the facts to you over and over.

Demand had been dropping since the beginning of the year but the price of crude kept rising up until the time that Bush ended the Federal ban on offshore drilling.

I filled up for $3.39 today. Thanks George.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: pdq
Date: 26 Aug 08 - 10:06 PM

Nationally, US gasoline dropped 15¢ per gallon in the last two weeks. Predicted to fall 5-10¢ more next week due to low demand, high inventory and good news in general. Gas at $2.99 on Nov. 4th will mean a landslide victory for Republicans. Dems must now hope for real bad news elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 27 Aug 08 - 12:04 AM

I sincerely doubt whether gas prices can swing a significant number of songle-issue voters even when falsely presented.

Why did prices go so high in the first place that it was such a relief to have them come down a bit? Do you remember cursing at $2.50??? I do.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Aug 08 - 03:35 AM

Typical Republican play, up the price of gas, with no belivable explanation, till it makes the American public sick then make like the Bushes are burning with a fuel price drop just as the election turns the corner. They can't drill their way out of this fabricated (see the profits) crisis but they sure can find a pipeline to the November elections. What bastards, they've play these same cards from the same deck before. Remember last elections when the same exact price play was delt from the bottom of the deck?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sazaw
Date: 28 Aug 08 - 05:30 PM

God knows the Democrats in power in Congress have done everything they can do to lower the price of gas.

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Amos
Date: 28 Aug 08 - 06:27 PM

By the time the Dems are done, Sawz, the price of gas will be so low you will even be able to afford it on your burger flipping and valet-parking salaries. But you won't need to.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Aug 08 - 07:41 PM

"Stop trying to prove that you're and idiot."



                         Why stop now?

Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
From: GUEST,Sawzaw
Date: 28 Aug 08 - 07:55 PM

"Sawz, the price of gas will be so low you will even be able to afford it on your burger flipping and valet-parking salaries. But you won't need to"

Nice cut there Amos. I haven't seen this much debating talent since elementary school. Have you stumbled on an important advance in philosophy?