Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:00 AM:Now I see where the priorities of the liberals lie. As liberlas refuse to lift the bans on drilling and nuclear power, rhe news reports instead, they decide to triple to $46 billion, the amount of AIDS relief to the AIDS racketeers in Africa. As the debt mounts from sending hundreds of billion to 2 bit oil dictators, as jobs are bing lost by the bushel, as inflation crushed Americans and the peoples pension funds ket killed by the dropping market, liberals say "SCREW YOU AMERICA, and instead fund their ... agenda to the tune of $46 billion

The Bottom Line wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:20 AM:In her letter, Kristie Young says "The question I pose is, will the oil companies respond by reducing prices if we reduce our consumption? Not in a million years.". She should have said "Not in a billion years (that's a b).". Right now, many water agencies are receiving less money because people are reducing their usage, so what do those agencies do? They increase their rates or their fees to compensate. We all, who do not have our own private well, are a "captive audience". Ya cain't win fer losin'.

Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:07 AM:The news is reporting that Seattle sold 5 of its problem-plagued public toilets on eBay. Thats pretty ... But why did they sell them on EBAY?, Seattle is so full of liberals you'd think they'd scarf them up like croissants.

Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:09 AM:>>Brian Bilbray has voted nay on every bill that has anything to do with helping the less fortunate,>> No sir, he votes no on passing out freebees that you desperately think should be free to you. Is there anything you think you should have to open your wallet for??

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:27 AM:I don't know why Judith Withers has such confidence in Mike Aguirre, as I recall he has not won ... case yet.
He has been wrong on virtually every case he's ever pursued, whether it be pension benefits, the Mt. Soledad cross, whatever. So, I wouldn't get to excited, just yet Judith.

The case against SDG&E apparently hinges on maintaince of these lines. Studies have shown that grid lines, power lines have a life span of 40 years, the particular power lines in question are 46 years old. SDG&E has been prevented from replacing the lines by numerous groups, some enviromental, some NIMBY's, but that will come into court, and I am confident SDG&E will not be held solely accountable.
Not to mention that all power lines, all grids locations, routes are approved by all levels of Government.
So just to say SDG&E decided to place these lines in a known fire area, is just more hype and blame game. The permiting process is so enormous, and detailed that it will be shown by SDG&E that they were directed by Government, and also prevented by groups from updated the grid.
So, don't count them chickens just yet.

And I don't know if Judith saw the article from the otherday, but SDG&E has decided to place solar arrays around the county as a part, of the total mix of electrical power for our region. Realise, it is only a part, a very small part, as rooftop solar will never be the sole power provider.
The technology is currently too expensive for most, requiring at least a $20,000 invest alone.
Surely you can not expect those low income workers to place a panel on thier rooftop, unless the government gives it to them.
Which reminds me, whether Mr. Aguirre is successful or not, the citizens, i.e. the taxpayers will pay for this lawsuit. Should he win, the consumers will pay the fines. If government decides to give away solar arrays to low income people, the taxpayer loses.
As I see this, it is a lose-lose-lose proposition. Now, don't get me wrong, if it can be proven that SDG&E is in fact to blame, soley. Sue em. Just know, they'll nevr pay a dime, you and I will. Cause that's how this works.
Legally you maybe right in going after the "wrong-doer", but financially, the consumer loses cause he/she pays the freight.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:51 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:00 AM: Yeah! And how about the two great wars that are nickeling and dimming us to death.

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:55 AM:Exactly right, Gordon Cargill!
Can you just imagine {to use a little John Lennon lingo there..} if all these lib's, the 24% who do not want to drill would simply stop using oil today, how much would be free'd up for the rest of us?
Houston, we have a problem.
The problem as I see it, is those who are complaining the most about greenhouse gases, saving Mother Gaya, and filthy oil, are the same people using it?
Could it be that we have some addicts in the liberal class? Refusing to give up their addiction? And angry cause they can't get another cheap fix?
I think so.

So all you liberal addicts, you have to go cold-turkey. It will be painful, I know. but you can do this!
Go out today and buy your bus pass. Heck... splurge a little, buy a regional pass! With all the money you'll be saving, pretty soon, you can go solar! Then buy an electric car, after scrapping your gas guzzler, cause.. you wouldn't want someone else to pick up your bad habit, now would you? that's very key here, don't pass your addiction onto another American.
You must SCRAP your car. No resale, no giving it away, just SCRAP. You'll get a little back on the scrap value, put it in your piggy bank.

You Hit It wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:34 AM:right on the head Gotta Wonder head. Bush is dimming us down. Dumbed down and dimmed down are some of the best ways to describe those who want us to stay in Iraq.

Quiz shows wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:58 AM:No coincidence that under the Bush presidency, we have "Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader?" If McCain wins, I guess we're in for "Truth or Demetia?" (Meanwhile, if elitist Obama is our next President, we'll have to suffer through "How Mensa sees it". Duh, like, how boring is THAT gonna be?!)

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:23 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:07 AM: At least we know what Chuck would like for Christmas.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:27 AM:"Fortunately, I would guess that by now, regular letter readers would only glance at the headline and a few words, then look below for the author's name and save the time of reading the same old ... garbage generated almost every two weeks." Wozer!
Let is what I do whenever I see a D. Beck letter.

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:34 AM:Ron: Good News! In both the House and the Senate there are bi-partisan groups working to get an energy bill passed over the objections of the House and Senate leadership.

The Christian Science Monitor several days ago had a great article on this movement – and one of the “Drill here, Drill Now" Senators said they had 10 Democrats on board and several were “well-known liberals.”

This is a "Bottom-up" movement, and in the Senate apparently includes 10 members of the Original Gang of 14, who have pushed the Senate before on stopping a threatened filibuster on approval of judges.

Yes, Senators and Representatives read the polls. Look for favorable action rather quickly.

Meanwhile, did anyone notice that in the two days since the president announced the ending of the presidential off-shore ban, we have had two days of the largest, and the second largest drops in crude oil prices in the last 19 years?

Coincidence?

Mark wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:35 AM:There was a report last night beringing into question why the Oil Companies,who currently own 68 million acres of land that they have yet to attempt to drill into, need more land at this moment? Anyone know why the oil companies would need more land when they have 68 MILLION acres that they have yet to tap into yet?

Chuck I know neoconservatives like yourself have trouble understanding how the world functions, unless you are scaring people with your "War on Terror",but people with knowledge about the world know the danger of an epidemic in the world. Like Reagan, I am sure it would make you feel better to sweep AIDS under the rug and ignore it, I mean after all it is a gay disease, right Chuck? Unfortunately the largest number of AIDS victims in Africa are young children. I would rather spend 46 billion trying to eradicate AIDS in the world, than 400 billion, or whatever astronomical number it reached today, fighting a war that shouldn't have been fought. I don't believe that any child in 2008 should die from AIDS while the world watches, just as I don't believe any soilders life should have been lost on the Iraq Sham. Iran has been the threat for years, but since we have spent so much time and money on Iraq, we will not be able to successfully wage a campaign against Iran if it comes to that. America isn't ready for another bloody conflict now as it is. You see Chuckles, closing your eyes does not make a problem go away. It just makes you ignorant.

You are actually right today about something. Americans need to decide, drill more, accept high gas prices, or find alternative means. Americans always want the easy answer, and unfortunately when it comes to oil, the solution won't be perfect for everyone. Solar panels are a great option for homes, but as Ron said, the average investment is 20,000 dollars, up front. Americans have been warned, for years, that oil was going to be a problem in the future, yet our government have failed to create new sources.
And finally, Chuckles, the huge debt, the dropping financial and housing markets, lost jobs, diminishing retirement funds, inflation, etc... are all results of Bush's failed economic plans. Since you have supported the man, it is fair to say you and the Bush supporters hate America. If you loved America, you would not have let Bush screw up our nation the way he has for the last 7 1/2 years.

Question for Greener wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:47 AM:Coincidence? As a student of the energy world and of economics, tell us, how could that announcement lead instantaneously to that drop in oil price? I'm curious. Thanks in advance.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:48 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:00 AM:
Just got to ask. Why didn't the Republican Congress from 2002 thru 2007 lift the ban?
Gotta wonder why Republicans hate our country?

Bottom up wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:49 AM:Yes, good old bottom up "movements". All you need for one is some price manipulation, an injection of fear, a portrayal of a scapegoat (the liberal environmentalists who must be causing the skyrocketing oil costs), and a promise of a magical solution (Drill Now! Drill Here! Drill Everywhere!). Voila! A bottom-up, "grass roots" movement. LOL

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:51 AM:The Bottom Line: You are so right. They would drill for American oil on American land or off shore leases. Next, the oil companies would either sell it to us for the world price market or sell it on the world market. Gotta Wonder.

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:54 AM:Ron – liberals going “cold turkey” is not in the cards, their basic hypocrisy aside.

The food on their table came from farmers driving tractors using, well you know FILTHY FINITE FOSSILE FUELS, and was delivered to the store by trucks burning FFFF. The food came wrapped in plastic made from FFFF, the store is lighted by FFF...the list is endless. Liberal environmentalists are like vegetarians who wear leather belts!

Remember the basic premise: "The homeless have zero carbon footprints, therefore we must emulate them."

While I am not quite where I want to be with a carbon footprint, everything is relative and I remain Greener Than Arnold, AND Greener Than Gore.

(But then, so is just about everyone.)

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:54 AM:Speaking of oil - I think it is time to find out exactly what was planned for US in the very secretative energy meeting that was held by Cheney and the oil guys. I always thought it was strange that the big oil folks (who have billion dollar profits) were the ones to make our "energy" policy - but it's pretty obvious now with the cost of gas and why we are at war in Iraq. Greed is killing America.

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:58 AM:Mark: GOOD QUESTION!

There has been a lot of writing on this blog about existing oil leases. One of the things least understood is the difference in leases: Most are exploratory – and then a NEW lease must be signed to DRILL, and that new lease requires all sorts of governmental permits, including an environmental impact report,

Can I mention the Destin Dome – and the source of my information is the NYTimes of May 30, 2002. in an article called US May Buy Back Oil Rights. (They did,)

Here are the facts. In 2000 Chevron bought the mineral rights to explore the Destin Dome for $10,2 million, in a huge section of Florida and in the Gulf off Pensacola from the US Government. Some of the land was private, and some federal government, but the government negotiated for all parties

Over the years Chevron spent about $100 million, and found natural gas in huge quantities. Reportedly 2.6 TRILLION cubic feet, or enough to provide for a million families for 30 years. The contract they had was to explore, not to pump, so they applied to pump – and the request sat in governmental desks for two years before it was DENIED – remember that Bush was president, and Jeb Bush was Governor. Appealed – denied.

Eventually, the US Government in the Florida/Gulf area under Clinton bought back $200 million in drilling rights, and the Bush administration bought back $235 million in drilling rights.

Chevron found billions of dollars in actual oil and actual natural gas, lost money, and both the oil and the gas sit there, undrilled and untapped.

That is a non-partisan lesson in oil leases.

But Mark wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:00 AM:The one fallacy that you inadvertantly presented in your 8:35 a.m. post is the use of an either/or in "Americans need to decide, drill more, accept high gas prices, or find alternative means.". Truth be told, it is not an either/or situation at all. That's what some from both sides continually say, one or the other, not both. My question is - Why must it be presented as a one or the other choice?

Asteroid wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:03 AM:Touché, Galen Kuenast. I have a little daily exercise where I scan the letters as you said, and it only takes a few words to recognize the garbage generated by a member of the North County Forum. It’s really sad that these people have nothing better going on in their lives that they can waste so much of it competing with each other for honors at their silly annual letters award diner.

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:10 AM:To Question: The answer is basic Econ. 101. The promise of future supply in a tight market will end upward speculation in that market.

The delivery of that future supply (whether through conservation or product) will overwhelm the demand, and drop the actual basic per unit price, but the prices will tend lower throughout the promise of that supply so that the market-clearing price will coincide with the promise and actual delivery at approximately the same time.

When the threat is of future shortages, prices move higher. When the threat is for future glut, prices move lower.

Here endeth today's lesson. (We have GOT to get further than Econ. 101!)

But Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:12 AM:you just gave a perfect reason for not drilling off-shore. The oil companies have already "gone through the first set of hoops" on land, leaving only one more set of hoops to go. All the while off-shore drilling has both sets of hoops and presents a far greater potential for spills and other disasters.

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:14 AM:Now, remember what I said the otherday.. "Greener Than Arnold"
@8:34 AM, and Mark my Words.

The political pressure by average Americans just trying to work & provide for their families do not want to hear anymore about seals, and polar bears, or some snail.
They want real solutions, and these fine men who are putting together this caucus know they will be in deep do-do if they do not act.

It was only a matter of time before these anti-drilling folks caved in, and some common sense was allowed to rise to the surface.
But, mark my words...

Pretty soon, your gonna hear from the Messiah, Barack Obama, that this "bridge" to the alternatives, was really part of his energy plan all along. He'll flip on this, like he did FISa, and then take credit for his great and novel ideas.
I say: Better late, than never.

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:22 AM:Hey "Mark" @8:35 AM, let me help you out with a clue, ok?
No one's buying that baloney. Gas is skyhigh, it's affecting the lowest incomes hardest, and no good liberal is gonna be able to take the heat, when people can't warm themselves in winter. I said the otherday, you really think a Vermontian is gonna ask is the oil or coal he's burning to stay warm, is clean or not? I don't think so, my friend. And this, is how they say, the rubber hits the road. Your reality, is conflicted by the real reality.

And as far as AIDS goes. It is THE most preventable disease known. Heck, with all the public school education you guy's have been handing out, I would expect by now, that those numbers would be all but eliminated, if you hype about "education" has any merit.
Woudn't you think so?


.."the Iraq Sham."?
You better go have a chat with the 25 million who are putting their lives back together. Your on the losing end of that deal too. We are winning, my friend. How come no death stats today?

Iran is a problem, even the passive Euro's think so.
You seem to be departing from the reality again.

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:25 AM:Interesting point there.. "Greener Than Arnold" @8:54 AM.
Anyone know how Birkenstocks are made?
If made with oil, I'd say walking is out of the question, unless barefoot.

DD Wiz wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:26 AM:The published letter from Gordon Cargill unintentionally comes closer to the mark than what he intended, though the posted reply from "Ron" (6:55am) does not.
I am not usually one to take suggestions from the victims of Big Oil propagandists who don't know what they are talking about (or do, which is disingenuously even worse), but the suggestions to stop fueling our cars with gas (or lower consumption to the level that can be satisfied by domestic production, if the mandates to sell oil from federal leases first to domestic use are reinstated from the 1992 repeal by papa GHW Bush) and to remove our houses from the natural-gas powered electric grid (or stay connected to the grid but provide more than you use). It is possible to do all these things and still live a high-quality lifestyle, and this is feasible NOW.
Where Cargill goes wrong is pushing for more drilling, which won't produce any new energy for at least a decade, which won't ensure that new drilling goes to domestic consumption first, and doesn't take into consideration that oil companies are already "sitting on" tens of millions of acres of viable oil lease lands that they need to develop first, again with the mandate restored for selling first to domestic markets.
And let me ask "Ron": do you, or do you not, support reinstating the mandate that if the Big Oil bullies who perpetuate our dependence on non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS, receive the corporate welfare of being allowed sweetheart deals to drill on PUBLIC federal lands, that they then be required to acknowledge that public debt by being forbidden to sell to any foreign market until all domestic consumption is first satisfied?
Can you just see why liberals are a tad suspicious when an oilman president allows Big Oil Bullies to sell oil from OUR LAND to the highest bidders on the international market instead of giving US first priority on OUR OIL?
Yes or no, "Ron," yes or no.

Nick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:33 AM:I have been on holiday for a few weeks and since I have returned, I have noticed some of the same old things being talked about.
One of these is folks still crying about oil company profits.
Apparently folks are O.K. with the disgustingly huge profits recorded by Big Pharma, Banks and Investment Institutions, but instead choose to complain about oil company profits.
Let's break it down a little for you folks. Oil companies only make about 8% on the dollar for profit.
Now consider that Big Pharma makes 19% on the dollar, Banks about 18%, and Diversified Financial Services about 13%.
Oil Company profits pale in comparison to other U.S. businesses.
Why is it that none of these folks ever complain about being ripped off by Big Pharma or our Banking Institutions?
People like to complain about what they are paying at the pump, but not about what the are paying in interest to the Banks or the assinine price for drugs or medicines.
The biggest group of lobbyists in Washington are Big Pharma. The funniest part is that Dems used to be Big Pharma's worst enemy until Big Pharma started pumping millions into the Democrat Party and now Big Pharma controls both sides.
I guess it boils down to what you really care about, cheap gas or cheap medicines.
From the posts on this subject over the last year, it is very apparent what is more important to people.
Cheers, Nick.

Mark wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:39 AM:But Mark,

Point taken.

Greenergy wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:40 AM:Greener (not) evades the question I left him with last night. With a typically nonsensical conservative non-sequitur, he complained that liberals "hate the poor" because no programs exist that help the poor receive help in being able to afford solar electricity and/or electric cars in a political environment where an obstructionist president and senate would immediately block any effort to offer such a plan.
I responded that, as a liberal, I would enthusiastically welcome massive incentives, offered on a sliding scale to favor low and moderate income consumers, to help them achieve energy independence, and asked him to either join me in broad cross-ideological support for such an effort (that he brought up) or admit that he is really the one who hates the poor.

And meanwhile, Ron at 6:55 a.m. and Greener (not) at 8:54 a.m. show their all-or-nothing extremist thinking as they demand immediate, complete "cold turkey" withdrawal from an oil addiction forced on American consumers by obstructionist oil barons and auto manufacturers, who for decades have blocked real alternatives that have been around for years. Their insistence on unrealistic, immediate, extreme 100% "cold turkey" shows they are simply unable to respond credibly to the real issue: substantial, phased-in transition to alternative energy sources as rapidly as is feasible (with "feasible" being much faster than what their propaganda admits).

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:43 AM:Why are people so ready to believe that offshore drilling will lower the price of oil? Any oil recovered will be sold on the World Market and will only marginally affect the price. The only benefit for offshore drilling goes to the Oil Companies. Try not to be such a sucker. Release the oil reserves for lower prices now!

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:43 AM:To But: (Sigh) NO SUCH THING!

What this example shows is that even "oil men" are sensitive to the wishes of the public -- and Floridians did not want the drilling. Then! (They do NOW!) (When the then Governor Bush signed off on ending the drilling, one wag remarked in the NYTimes “16 million Floridians opposed the drilling. Gov. Bush just made it 16 million and ONE!”)

The Katrina Hurricane blew out scores of undersea wells -- washed huge structures ashore!

No oil spills! None! Zero! Modern technology, "But," modern technology!

Think of all those wells in the North Sea -- one of the roughest patches of water on earth!

“But” Russia is drilling off Alaska. China will be drilling off Florida. Had you rather have them, with their technology drill, or us?

Had you rather have their government company take the profit, or our private company?

(I am almost afraid of the answer.)

Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:52 AM:Liberals are demanding immigration reform. In case you dont know that equates to $hundreds of billions of free citizenship, free education, free medical, etc, etc. And at they same time, they are bashing Bush and the miltary for spending on the war against terrorism. Thats the difference- Conservatives want to fight terrorism and protect America, liberals want to open the borders to drain the treasury, they dont want to drill or nuclear plants and prefer to send our treasury to the oil cartels, and now they want wide open border for AIDS refugees from Africa

Nick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:52 AM:A question for you "Ms M". I see you are concerned about the secret meeting between Cheney and the oil company folks.
Why are you not concerned about the secret meeting between Obama, Hillary and The Bilderberg Group?
Another thing I find strange is that not 12 hours after winning the Democrat Party nomination, Obama, Hillary, McCain and 300 Senators and members of Congress rushed off to the AIPAC conference (American Israeli Political Action Committee).
What exactly was so important about this conference ?
Google Obamas speech at this conference and you will find it to be the most rear-end kissing speech ever given to AIPAC.
Just saying......
Cheers, Nick.

OBAMACAN wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:02 AM:Not surprisingly, there goes Ron again at 9:14 a.m., showing that since he has no argument based on issues, his sole basis for anything he says is to make fun of people's names or invent irrelevant hyperbole or outright made-up "facts".
He repeats the "Obama as Messiah" thing that no Obama supporter has ever said, but only comes from those trying to ridicule a talented politician when they can't find anything of substance to address.
:::::::yawn::::::: So typical.
As for the FISA thing, again, no flip from Obama. He said he was against the telecom immunity and still is. He explained that in a compromise, you agree to some concessions that you don't agree with to get others you do. I don't consider him infallible, and I disagree with him in this instance as to where he drew the line. But it is not a flipflop. Wanna talk about flip flops?
I notice you were awfully silent about your guy:
Voted against the Bush tax cuts for the richest elites, now says they should be made permanent.
Was against torture, before voting to allow it.
Was against offshore drilling before he was for it.
Sponsored the Kennedy-McCain immigration amnesty plan, now opposes it.
Gives lip service to environmental and climate change issues, but missed 22 chances last year to back up that lip service with actual votes.
Called Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell "agents of intolerance" before reversing himself and going hat-in-hand to them seeking their endorsements.
Voted against requiring insurers who cover Viagra to offer contraceptive parity for women, now his spokeswoman Carla Fiorina says he supports that.

And a little update from yesterday: Obamas Interpreter at 9:44 p.m. last night complains he doesn't like my "arrogance" because "it's unattractive, no, it's downright ugly." Guess what, little man, little insecure man, no one here is trying to impress you. And I doubt anyone ever linked the arrogance and intractability of George Dubya Bush, another little, insecure man, to his "attractiveness."
I agree with what TFB said earlier in the day yesterday:
"A man of quality (of which there are many) is not threatened by a woman of equality."
And, little man, you're no man of quality.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:03 AM:Gotta Wonder[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:43 AM: Gotta Wonder why some people use other people's handles on this blog. Gotta Wonder if they are cowards? I think that this bird has a big yellow tail!

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:07 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:52 AM: The only thing that conservatives and business wants to do is make huge profits from the war. If conservatives wanted to protect Americans from terrorism, they would have never invaded Iraq but stayed in Afghanistan. Liberals will support alternative fuel sources for the future. All this oil you guys yak about will not be available for five to ten years at the world market prices. Big smelly smokescreen.

Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:08 AM:I see our flyboys killed another eight civilians in Afghanistan. That is on top of the 47 civilians they killed sunday. Now of course you don't see much of that if anything in the NCTimes but if it was a carbomging it would be front page. Just maybe this is why the Afghanistanis are supporting the insurgents more and more. The problem is that whenever we send our troops somewhere they make a bloody mess out of it.

hardtack wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:09 AM:Kristie Young asks: “Does anyone really believe that a single company needs $160 billion a year in profit to survive?”

I don’t know, and I don’t think Kristie does, either. Not being an oil company insider, I don’t know what their R&D, real estate, building, equipment replacement, technical, administrative and legal budget runs, annually – but I can see $160 billion is possible.

On the other hand, I have read the Constitution of the United States, and I cannot believe that our federal government needs $3 trillion to perform their limited duties. I think Kristie Young is looking for gluttonous excess in all the wrong places.

Taxpayers are people too wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:11 AM:Apparently Ron Susi doesn’t think looking out for the tax payer is part of Brian Bilbray’s job.

to Eric Parrish wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:14 AM:observer[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:49 AM:To Eric Parrish

How is it that you call it an illegal occupation since 1967. The fact is, the Arabs attacked Israel, and the Israelis defended themselves heroically and soundly defeated their aggressors. As a result, areas like Gaza, the West Bank, Golan Heights were won as a result of that battle. This is historically known as the "spoils of war". Had the Arabs chosen not to attack Israel, and instead taken the peaceful path YOU describe, they would not be crying today. Obviously the Arabs still have not learned their lesson and continue to bomb civilians and so it is only a matter of time till the Israelis beat back the aggressors again just as they have several other times.

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:17 AM:Nick
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:52 AM:A question for you "Ms M". I see you are concerned about the secret meeting between Cheney and the oil company folks. Why are you not concerned about the secret meeting between Obama, Hillary and The Bilderberg Group? Nick - did you really read my question - it's about oil, that's what we are writing about - why are you changing the SUBJECT matter?

Apples and Oranges wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:20 AM:“The Bottom line” compares a water utility monopoly with a competitive free market entity. Pardon the pun, but the analogy doesn’t hold water.

Apollo wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:27 AM:Re: Nick (9:52 a.m.)
Here come the tinfoil hats! With no evidence, no dates, no NOTHING, Nick alleges "secret meetings" between Obama, Hillary and "The Bilderberg Group." Oooh, scary stuff. The boogey-men are loose again!
Guess what, Nick, we have the dates, times and places of Cheney's meetings with the oil companies. There is even video going in and out. The only thing secret about it is the content once they closed the doors, and Cheney violates the Constitution by illegally setting the Executive Branch above the other two co-equal branches, when he refuses to turn over the notes, videos and any other records of these meetings when subpoened by Congress.
Don't you think it is funny, Cheney meets with Enron and all his major oil donors and cronies, and comes out and the result is a tripling in gas prices (and oil company profits) and public hysteria getting the public to demand that we cave in and give the oil companies everything they want, including more oil leases to sit on.
As has been said here, they've manipuled (most of) us right where they want us.
I applaud DDWiz and Greenergy for giving the middle digit to the oil companies and telling 'em, "we don't need your stinkin' oil" and hope more of us will / can follow suit.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:28 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM:
I know. I know. It is NSA survelence.

Asteroid wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:44 AM:I don't know what a "flyboy" is, but if chris doesn't like them, they must be doing a great job. Go flyboys!

Mark wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:46 AM:Ron,
In typical fashion you don't pay attention. Probably why you think we are 'winning" in Iraq. 25 million people ? There are no 25 million people putting their lives back together. If you actually research, you would find that presently, through Iraq, the people are scared. Afraid to come out of their homes. The American soilders are doing what they can, but even they feel overwhelmed. Most of the soilders are on 3rd and 4th tours of duty, and are worn out mentally and physically, but they push on. But I forgot, as a Republican, you don't care about the soilders and what happens to them. As long as you can say we are winning and wave your flag(a true sign of a patriot, of course) you are happy. Keep living in your dream world, the rest of us will deal with reality, as hard as it is sometimes. Outisde of mindless Neocons like yourself, most people realize that the conflict in Iraq is far from ok and the hardest times are ahead. No deaths in Iraq today. Look at the news for the last week and you will see the bodycount. As for the price of oil, I never said that the people in Vermont would care about clean or dirty fuels. What I said, pay attention Ron, was that the poorest members of our society will be the hardest hit if oil continues to stay at present prices. That is not political hyperbole, it is reality. You don't like facts? Sorry. Republicans the last 7 1/2 years have not been good with facts anyway.

Again Ron, pay attention, we were talking about AIDS in Africa. I agree American children are educated on AIDS. Unfortunately, in AFRICA, education on AIDS has been difficult to distribute and supply. Again, children have been hit hardest in Africa, and there is no excuse that anyone can give, that excuses allowing children, foreign or domestic, to suffer and die, just because you don't like supporting it. This isn't a gay, straight, or drug based issue. It is a human issue. You have been blessed. You are an American. Don't take that for granted Ron. Have empathy for others. It is what makes us truly "human".

Mark wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:47 AM:Greener than Arnold- Thank you for the info.

Alf wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:48 AM:Welcome back, "Nick". Per your 9:33AM post, which is more money - 8% of 100,000,000 gallons at $4.50 per gallon ($36 million), 8% of 100,000,000 gallons at $3.00 per gallon ($24 million), 8% of 100,000,000 gallons at $5.00 per gallon ($40 million)or 18% of $100,000,000 ($18 million)? For gasoline the primary unit is 1 gallon and its price is quite variable. For banks the primary unit is 1 dollar which costs 1 dollar today, yesterday and tomorrow although its buying power seems never to do anything except go down. What I'm getting at is that when you sell lots of something at a fairly low profit margin you can still make more money than someone who has a higher profit margin but they don't sell as many. Your thoughts?? Regards, Alf.

Well Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:55 AM:Reardon gleefully points out that Prez Bush's announcement of cancelling the off shore drilling ban has dropped the price of oil. So where is the drop in the price of gasoline, Reardon? More bs from the oil mongers. It kills me that people are still willing to believe anything the liars say just because they refuse to give up their oil gutting lifestyles.

If only wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:58 AM:From the NY Times QUOTE Former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday that Americans must abandon fossil fuels within a decade and rely on the sun, the winds and other environmentally friendly sources of electric power, or risk losing their national security as well as their creature comforts. ENDQUOTE Uh oh, such a proposal might create tens of thousands of jobs, billions of dollars of revenues, and independence from middle eastern oil. Can't have that with oil employees Bush and Cheney in charge. And this might really upset the Saudis. Quick! Everyone insult Al Gore repeatedly ASAP. Distract! Distract! My oil stocks! Think of my oil stocks!

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:03 AM:To Gotta Wonder (If that is really the same Gotta Wonder); Drilling offshore will not lower the price of oil. Supply of energy, from any source -- offshore, onshore, coal, natural gas, coal shale, solar, conservation, nuclear, wind, geothermal, methane from cows -- ANY source when in excess to demand, will lower the price of oil!

Offshore drilling is not THE answer. It is ONE answer!

Ron wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:14 AM:That's right, "Wizzer" @9:26 AM, "It is possible to do all these things and still live a high-quality lifestyle, and this is feasible NOW." For a price, some simply can not afford it, as you can. Some, I would imagine, hoped in the back of their minds, this was another passing trend that wouldn't hold. But my point is directed at those who believe in the technology so much, that they preach {and that's the right word} Preach gettin off oil altogether.
If you truly believe that they are filthy, that they are evil and destroying the enviroment, causing global warming, then Yes.. YOU should be the first to deploy these technologies.
That's why I admire you, Wiz. We maybe on different sides of this issue, but I admire a man who does what he says.
My thought is, many of the rest who echo your thoughts may not be "so clean:", one might say. For those who preach the hypocricy, I say ENOUGH!
Either get on the alternatives, or shut up. Nothing worse than a man or woman who does not live up to their own expectations, then insults the rest of us by demanding we do.

As to "...oil companies are already "sitting on" tens of millions of acres of viable oil lease lands..."

Let me say this. It would seem to me that your thought is right, we should develop what we already have leased.
But here's the problem. For the last 14 Congresses, and the last 3 Presidents, we have "corral'd" where we would allow drilling. We don't know how "Viable" these leases really are. In fact, no one really does until you tap the hole. Geologists make pretty good guesses, and according to most geologists I'm reading, they say these off-shore reserves are known. Kind of like looking for a needle in a haystack, and I'm willing to allow them just a little more haystack to look in. I think Congress will too, and very soon.
They can not hold back this anger Americans are feeling right now. And just as you may say drilling may be years down the line, so will alternatives. Just because Honda leased 24 cars this year, does not mean the technology is ready. Solar will not affect gas price. Bio-fuels, maybe if you got a diesel engine.
For most Americans, their car will not need to be replaced for about 9 years. That's the national average to replace 1/2 the national fleet, which is about 240 million cars & trucks.

And as to your last question, I've said it before. NO..
I don't not like corporate welfare of any kind. I don't like subsidizing industries. One of the key economic problems we have in this country is that we give money to subsidize otherwise failing industries.
Let the market work. If alternatives are truly cost competitive with oil at $3 bucks, then I see no reason to subsidize them either. Working towards new technology, fine, I get it.
But outright giving money to companies. I don't think so.

Obamas Interpreter wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:16 AM:OBAMACAN
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:02 AM:And a little update from yesterday: Obamas Interpreter at 9:44 p.m. last night complains he doesn't like my "arrogance" because "it's unattractive, no, it's downright ugly." Guess what, little man, little insecure man, no one here is trying to impress you". OUCH! You got me OBAMACAN, LOL That was funny, As Redd Foxx (Sanford & Son,TV 1972-77)used to grab at his heart and say,"This is the big one, you hear that Elizabeth, I'm coming to join you honey!". See ya down the road OBAMACAN. Good day!

The Bottom Line wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:26 AM:Sorry, Apples and Oranges, I'm not. Do you get your domestic water from other than the local water district? Do you get your gasoline from anywhere other than a gasoline station? There is not any real competition and you know it. Is there any station that sells significantly lower priced than the other, like 50 or 60 cents or a dollar or 2 dollars less? If not, why not? Please give me some indication that they are independent or being competitive in any significant way?

Nick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:27 AM:"Ms M", it is not changing the subject. It has everything to do with the price of oil.
I am only assuming that you, like "Apollo", seem to think that the oil companies are the ones dictating the price of oil. Both of you couldn't be further from the truth. If they were, they would be making way more than the measly 8% that they are making.
"Apollo" can cry boogie-man all he wants, but there is more than enough evidence out there to show the power wielded by The Bilderberg Group, The Trilateral Commission and The World Bank.
There are greater powers manipulating our politics and the price of oil than just the oil companies.
Do your homework and find out for yourself.
Cheers, Nick.

Hello Moderator wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:32 AM:Why does the comment from Chuck say that it is "Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM"?

Whats up wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:34 AM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM: What's up with this date?

Nick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:45 AM:Thanks "Alf". You pose a very good question amigo.
When put in a perspective such as the one you pose, I am only assuming here, that Big Pharma sells more pills and drugs than oil companies sell gallons of oil.
For the first time ever, in 2006, global spending on prescription drugs topped $643 billion, even as growth slowed somewhat in Europe and North America. The United States accounts for almost half of the global pharmaceutical market, with $289 billion in annual sales followed by the EU and Japan.
In regards to the banking industry, worldwide assets of the largest 1,000 banks grew 16.3% in 2006/2007 to reach a record $74.2 trillion. This follows a 5.4% increase in the previous year. EU banks held the largest share, 53%, up from 43% a decade earlier. The growth in Europe’s share was mostly at the expense of Japanese banks whose share more than halved during this period from 21% to 10%. The share of US banks remained relatively stable at around 14%. That 14% amounts to about 14 Billion dollars a year.
I hope this helps out a bit.
Cheers, Nick.

sdraoul wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:48 AM:Obamacan is at it again. Issues? Obama is wrong on each issue addressed by his web site even after its "scrubbing."

Issue, Obama was against the "surge" from the beginning and has claimed it has not worked from the first day.

Let's see, idiot congressmen declared 18 goals the Iraq government must meet in order for Congress to vote money for Iraq. So far the Iraqis have made satisfactory progress on 15 of the benchmarks, fifteen. Does Obama know that, apparently not.

Ten provinces have been turned over to the Iraqi Army for security with 8 to go.

Obama has been wrong on the surge so much that his web site that Obamacan always points us to has been cleaned up and his embarrassing surge position has changed and the old attacks on it on the surge are gone.

He is now "refining" his position because he knows the Iraqis are demanding a longer presence of Americans in Iraq even as they want a "timeline." Good source say Iraq wants at last 60 months, not 16 Obama months.

Even if he becomes President and orders a 16-month withdrawal, it isn't possible. Any veteran knows that but hsi community organizing experience doesn't have moving thousands of tanks and vehicles by sea out of a war theater.

Of course, we can always just leave it there and write off billions in equipment. That's the Obama way.

That is far more significant than McCain’s change on tax cuts that took place over 8 years, not 8 days as with Obama.

Obama promised to "filibuster" the FISA bill if it contained immunity for telecom companies. When the time came, he tucked his tail between his legs and voted for the bill because he knew a filibuster would do no good and that, in fact, he would have been shut down within minutes. It was a huge defeat for Obama.

Then came the New Yorker magazine cover. Obama apparently has no sense of humor..

Apples Oranges wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:57 AM:The Bottom Line, have you taken your “information” to the FTC and told them you have evidence of price fixing and restraint of trade? Go for it.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:00 PM:Oil: 8% profit. Boo Hoo for the oil companies. Conservatives like to use the percentage rather than the profit dollars.
Americans are more concerned with oil profits because oil drives the economy.
Gotta wonder why they always like that percentage quote instead of profit dollars?

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:06 PM:Nick
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:27 AM:...Nick you have attempted to change the subject. Obama and Clintons visit to the meeting earlier this year has blip to do with the oil mess we are in. Now the ENERGERY MEETING has EVERYTHING to do with this mess. I don't dispute the fact that outside forces influence our policy, it's more than obvoius looking at what has happened to our country in the past 7 years. The cons have belonged to these organizations for years - why now are you having such heart burn over this?

Greener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:23 PM:Gotta Wonder; Because % is the only thing that matters to an investor -- like your 401K!

The amount of money you get on that % depends upon how much you invest.

Same with a corporation, which is an entity like a "person."

Here endeth today's Second Lesson of Econ. 101 -- but we MUST get out of the 101 series! Public school graduates MUST get a grip of subject matter so we can move on to more sophisticated subjects! Honest!

OH PLEASE wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:39 PM:sdraoul[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:48 AM:
The Iraqi War has been one big write off since its initiation. It took them nearly 8 years to reach 15 of 18 expected bench marks? When was the first date, that those bench marks were to be meant? Was it after 1000 of our men were dead or was it 3,000 or was it 4,200 KIA? Ten provinces turned over to Iraq in almost 8 years. Eight more provinces in Iraq to go. That could mean at least another 8 in Iraq while our men are being killed in Afghanistan, the real war against terror. A good source says that the Iraqis want 60 months. Don't buy it. Let's hear what the Iraqis want publicly from them and not some imagined source. We will not be losing or dumping billions of dollars when we leave. Our newly trained Iraqi Army will need that equipment. They can pay for it or accept it as a gift. I am vet and everything that we want to take with us can be done in 16 months. In fact, I have great confidence in our armed forces than sdraoul. We can move just as fast out of Iraq as we did when we invaded. Whadda ya thinkin?

question for raoul wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:41 PM:Since your astute journalistic eye never misses a candidate's change of position, might you list the changes in position of one John McCain? And I see, too, that you note when a candidate is right a wrong, bragging about how right McCain was about the surege (by the way, raoul: in 2002 and in the early days of the invasion, Mccain stood with those who scoffed at the generals who thought a larger force would be needed; then he changed his mind, as usual). Obama, of course, was right about Afghanistan (McCain was wrong) and right about Saddam (McCain was wrong) and right about whether an Iran invasion was justified (McCain, enchanted by Ahmed Chalabi, was wrong). But don't worry, raoul: your guy is coming around to agreeing with Obama about increasing the force in Afghanistan, finally, where our actual attackers are.

Concerned One wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:53 PM:Wow, I was going to comment on the Ron vs DD posts today, but then I noticed Chuck's time/space continuum. Dudes, where are the tin foil hats? This on the same day Nick returns (welcome back). What's next Harry awakes to ring the liberal bell? What a day! Regards, C-1.

Alf wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:54 PM:Shore did, "Nick" at 11:45AM. You gave some dollar figures that provokes thought, especially when one gets into the hundreds of billions and into the trillions. Pharma is helped along by hospitals in a way, the price of one pill dispensed in a hospital is often the same price as 1 whole month worth when bought at a drug store.
As "Gotta wonder" at 12:00PM points out, percentage profit "don't mean doodly", it is the total bucks that count.
As a side note, whatever happened to the comment by "Chuck" has made it always be "the last word", perpetually "on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM.
Regards, Alf.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 12:57 PM:The Washington D.C. Silly Council is trying to circumvent the SCOTUS decision on the ownership of guns – by changing as few of their onerous gun ban as possible.

Obstructionism is the main tool of liberals, everywhere. (Green= Obstruct) In this case they have taken a page from the Colonies, who perfected the art of making laws, knowing that those laws must be confirmed by the British Parliament – and that overturning the Colony Law would take a year of sailing and talking before the law could be overturned…by which time the Colonists had a newly worded law!

In this case, the Silly Council keeps the limit on semi-automatic clips, trigger locks, locked storage, etc. – and I am not certain how that comports with the decision that guns are for individual self-defense. If it isn’t quickly available, it can’t be used for self defense – but, you know liberals!

The Washington D.C. Silly Council knows it may take a decade to have the new law overturned. That is 10 times longer than the days of sailing ships!

Ain’t progress grand?

Chuck tell the whole truth wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:04 PM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM:The news is reporting that "Dozens of catfish walk through Florida neighborhood". Chuck, That's not entirely true, I saw the video, some are seen running!!:)

Above the law wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:12 PM:From Reuters QUOTE WASHINGTON - President George W. Bush, asserting executive privilege, has rejected Congress’ request for documents on FBI interviews with Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney from a probe to find who leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson.

The Bush administration said on Wednesday that turning over such records would violate the president’s rights to counsel from his staff.

In a letter to the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee, U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Keith Nelson wrote, “The attorney general has requested that the president assert executive privilege with respect to these documents and the president has done so.” The letter was delivered on the same day the committee was scheduled to vote on a possible contempt resolution against Attorney General Michael Mukasey for failing to provide the requested information. Rep. Henry Waxman, the California Democrat who chairs the committee, called the executive privilege claim “ludicrous,” but postponed committee action against Mukasey, saying lawmakers needed time to review Bush’s claim. ENDQUOTE What's covered by executive privilege is what I say is covered by executive privilege...that's why it's CALLED executive privilege. The Bush model for our youth: power is the only law you need to concern yourself with.

Chris to to Eric Parish wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:14 PM:No the Arabs did not attack Israel. Israel was threatening to attack Syria and the Arabs were putting up a defensive posture and then Israel attacked the Arabs. The reality is that this was another way for the Israelis to grab the rest of Palestine and make it look like they were defending themselves. It would be nice if all you Israel lover did any research but after all why should you do that because you know it all already.

to Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:16 PM:Gee, I could've sworn obstruction was an equal opportunity strategy. You mean it hasn't been the Republicans in Congress that have used the filibuster to kill almost every bill the Democrats have tried to pass? Fooled me. And then there are all the ways the executive branch and the Cheney branch have dealt with subpoenas and other requests for information about how they've been running things. I could've sworn that was also obstructionistic, but I must be wrong. Only liberals obstruct. But if I'm not wrong, then you need a new moniker. LOL

esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:19 PM:Chris, why do you denounce the US troops for barking their dogs at detainees, but you refuse to denounce terrorists who bash little girls heads in? Ah who am I kidding, NCT won't print this...

Need Econ class wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:33 PM:Sorry, I must be stupid. The president announces he is lifting the executive ban on offshore drilling, which has no power to change offshore drilling in itself. It might, however, nudge Congress into actually approving offshore drilling. If offshore drilling happens, then in around 10 years there might be a lot more oil available. Because of this, investors/speculators in oil are bailing out NOW? Anticipating possible lower oil prices in a decade? Huh?

Both ways on the surge wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:37 PM:You have to laugh at the McCainians. On the one hand, they want to brag about how their guy's "surge" was THE answer in Iraq, and how because of it, we're "winning". But when you say to them, "OK, congratulations, it worked. So let's start pulling out like the Iraqis want us to do.", they say, "Oh, no, Iraq is not stable enough yet. We need permanent bases there!" So they insist the surge is both a proven success and a substantial failure. D'oy.

Nick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:37 PM:No "Ms M", it is NOT changing the subject, but the very heart of the subject. As usual, you are so obsessed with your hatred of Conservatives that you can't see the writing in front of your face. The Bilderberg Group, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations and The Bank have entrenched themselves on BOTH sides of the Party Lines.
The Bilderberg Group met in Munich Germany in May 2005 when crude oil prices were around the $40 a barrel mark.
During the conference, Henry Kissinger told his fellow attendees that the elite had resolved to ensure that oil prices would double over the course of the next 12-24 months, which is exactly what has happened.
During their 2006 meeting in Ottawa Canada, Bilderberg agreed to push for $105 a barrel before the end of 2008. This information was gleaned from sources inside Bilderberg who have proven reliable in the past. That figure has already been surpassed by $15 dollars as oil shot up past $120 dollars a barrel today.
If anything, the plan to hike oil prices up to $200 is on an accelerated course.
The Bilderberg Group have sworn to bring about what Jose Barroso, President of the European Commission and a Bilderberg member, refers to as the "post-industrial revolution," which in layman's terms translates as a global economic crash, another great depression and the total evisceration of the middle class.
Yeppers, just 100 of the most powerful and influential men in the world sitting around chatting.
Yeppers, they're not up to anything. It's those sneaky oil companies who are up to no good....LOL.
If it's not the oil companies, it has to be those nasty Conservatives.
After all, everyone knows how squeeky clean and wonderful Democrats are...LOL.
They only want whats best for all of us, even though you may not want it.

Apollo wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:38 PM:Re: SDRaoul (11:48 a.m.)
It is great to see SDRaoul demonstrating is famous (or infamous?) writing talents, though I'm just not sure that this is the most appropriate forum for fiction.
Obama was against the escalation (not surge) because it was lousy policy.
Obama has claimed it has not worked from the first day because IT HAS NOT WORKED! You cannot call the "surge" a success when its basic purpose has been a complete, 100% FAILURE. The purpose of the surge was to calm things down to allow time for POLITICAL processes to bring about a Sunni / Shia reconciliation, at least to the point where they could form a functioning government. Our wonderful military gave them the calming space they needed, but where are the political solutions. There are none!
But of course, we cannot expect conservatives who get their "news" (I mean propaganda) from Faux news division of the Republican Party, when the Republicans can't even tell the difference between a Sunni and a Shia. Before the 2003 Iraq invasion, McCain said that the Sunni and Shia had lived a thousand years in peace before Saddam (they had not, it had been 1,000 years of warring, brought under temporary control only by Saddam's heavy hand) and last year, while touring in Iraq, McCain had to be corrected by a former Democrat, Joe Liebermann, when he repeatedly mixed up Sunni and Shia.
So much for 26 years of "experience" as a Washington insider.
At least Obama got it right from the start, and can tell the difference between Sunni and Shia.
But then Obama doesn't depend on Faux news for his information.

And since SDRaoul's imaginative fiction was directed toward Obamacan, I do note that SDRaoul did not address a single one of the infamous McCain flip-flops she cited at 10:02 a.m.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:38 PM:esteban[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:19 PM:
So, its ok for American soldiers to be terrorists? You excuse the immorality of American men because the men of terror or immoral.

Bravo Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:38 PM:Chuck, Great way to get the last word, Bravo. They have to look at your name all day, that has got to be driving them nuts. Can you still say nuts after the Rev. Jackson thing?

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:39 PM:Gotta Wonder and Alf will each stay after class until they master the basics of Economics 101.

If you have taken this course before, please tell me at which institution of higher learning? (Their accreditation is in serious jeopardy!)

But I understand – I met and had breakfast with John Corcoran, who had a degree from a teacher college, a teaching credential, and taught English in a North County high school for a decade! He was so illiterate that he determined the Men’s from the Ladies Room by the length of the words! (He now has a North County Literacy Program!)

If necessary, remediation on basic economics will continue. I headed the North County Junior Achievement organization and taught many courses in public schools (PUSD), so I really do understand the problem with economic literacy.

Oh esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:44 PM:Please, we've been over this a million times, haven't we? I don't know about Chris, but I know I don't criticize the terrorists because I honestly feel it's not necessary. That murder is bad is, um, obvious to me. Is that wrong of me? Have I missed something? I point out the crimes of Bush's policies only because, apparently, when SOME people murder, some posters don't think it's a bad thing. So, amazingly, these folks seem to actually need to be shown or reminded. Go figure. But, if you need it, esteban, as a liberal let me say for the record, to ease your mind and to clear up your confusion: I think killing people when it's not in self-defense and necessary is a terrible thing to do, by anyone. I believe this covers just about all the acts of terror that occur. OK? I'll be happy to answer any other difficult questions you may have.

Question for Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:49 PM:I'm sorry, but did the Supreme Court rule that our right to possess firearms was for the purpose of individual self-defense? I would guess so, since they were clear about the trigger-locks, but I don't recall if they actually gave "self defense" as the reason for their decision. I always thought the right to keep and bear arms WAS an individual right, because people might be needed if called up to a well-regulated militia. Makes sense to me. But the "self defense" idea is not in the language of the second amendment. So I wondered if the Court actually said this. If they did, they were "activists", clearly, if you read the language of the amendment. Thanks in advance.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:01 PM:To Need Econ Class: Indeed you do! The president announcing the removal of only a presidential ban on offshore drilling, combined with Congressional SERIOUS movement toward an energy policy delivers a SERIOUS message to speculators! If you read Greener Than Arnold's posting of the Destin Dome, then you might comprehend that there are places -- many places -- where there are PROVEN energy supplies that are only lying fallow because of obstructionists, and will not take anything NEAR 10 years to produce.

Some development may well take years, even decades, but we are on "the Critical Path" which, for the unenlightened simply means that one day's delay today means one day's delay on delivery. (Courses in Project Management also available at no extra cost.)

Oil shale is an example -- and the president mentioned that as well. This from today's Denver Post:

(Quote)Estimates

President Bush would like to allow drills in coastal waters to extract oil and gas. (The New York Times) on how much oil is available in shale vary. There is potentially 500 billion barrels in Colorado's shale, according to a 2005 Rand report. But the state Department of Natural Resources cautioned that no one knows for certain how much oil is there.

Bush said 800 billion barrels total are available in the West, "more than three times larger than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia" and "equal to more than a century's worth of currently projected oil imports."

But extracting oil from rock is difficult, said Sen. Ken Salazar, the Colorado Democrat who, along with Udall, inserted a development ban into a spending bill last year. (Unquote)

Please note which party submitted and passed the obstructionism in the spending bill.

To Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:02 PM:I can hear your jackboots slapping the pavement. Your assertion that Israel was the aggressor in the Six Day War ignores the belligerent actions taken by Egypt with full knowledge that such actions if successful in provoking Israel in to action would also draw in Egypt’s allies. Israel was at the time and continues to be surrounded by mostly by enemies. The Palestinian issue is a red herring used by those that seek to eradicate the Jewish people. The Muslim Arab world barely cares about the Palestinians, and hardly acknowledges them as part of their world.

USMC wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:05 PM:Asteroid[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:44 AM: Mike, you really do know? They are airdales.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:16 PM:Ahhh, Nick. I’m sorry, but if I will not take unsourced information from others, you don’t get a pass – and “This information was gleaned from sources inside Bilderberg who have proven reliable in the past” won’t cut it. Source it or just label it as your opinion -- which you are certainly entitled to.

Further you say that “Jose Barroso, President of the European Commission and a Bilderberg member, refers to as the "post-industrial revolution," which in layman's terms translates as a global economic crash, another great depression and the total evisceration of the middle class.”

Please refer me to the definition of “post industrial revolution” as “global economic crash, another great depression and the total evisceration of the middle class.”

rich wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:16 PM:If the surge is working or has worked, then why did Rich Lowry in his editorial yesterday again denounce Obama while at the same time admitting that we can't reduce troops now that the surge has quelled violence temporarily or else Al Qaeda will increase in number in Iraq. To me, that proves the surge indeed is not working, it's just an escalation that lowered violence only while we permanently remain at this elvated level. Isn't it interesting that Lowry doesn't seem to grasp that the British General who wrote a book on the experience in Basra flatly stated that Al Qaeda was invited into iraq reluctantly by Sunni citizens who feared the upcoming U.S. invasion. So the Obama position that Al Qaeda might leave, or at least be handled by the now well armed thanks to us Shia Iraq, after we leave, is fully tenable, more teanble than the usual 'we must stay indefinitely' or else the violence might go back up--even if it means we go bankrupt doing it.

Greenergy wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:27 PM:Greener (not) at 12:23 p.m. betrays his lack of ethics, when he asserts that "% is the only thing that matters to an investor -- like your 401K!"
Yes, percent of ROI is important to every investor or business person, but it is only "the only thing" for those who prostitute their values on the altar of the almighty, sacred dollar.
Many of us do allocate our investments, including 401(k)'s, IRA's and others based on additional considerations, and find that we can find PROFITABLE investments in companies that care about the environment, workers and consumers. There are even mutual funds set up to find stocks that are profitable, yes, but also care about other important matters. Maybe you get a better % ROI than I do, though I wouldn't bet on it, but I bet I sleep better at night.

rich wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:29 PM:The 'Democrat Congress' didn't cause the high gas prices we now are seeing. In fact, again, Europe gas prices have been over 6.00 a gallon for decades.It's a resource that we still don't know how long it takes to form a given volume while we extract whatever the demand seems to be anyway. Dems don't "want" high gas prices. Where does GWB get this? First of all, there is no such thing as a democrat congress, since congress refers to a group of politicians, while democrat is not a plural word and is a noun, not an adjective. It seems the reason GWB talks this way is to talk down to congress and this is consistent with his refusal to supply information to Congress when they ask for it, and his constant badgering them to pass funds for Iraq and to pass legislation that changes the Constitution, like it's not good enough for our country anymore. Is it simply too much to believe that it might be possible that Democrats are who they are because they believe in a Democracy that listens to and serves people, istead of ruling over them and being their decider? Demanding oil from CA is usually less effective than asking 'please', but GWB insists on having his way and somehow it seems he usually gets it, polls being irrelevant.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:41 PM:To Gotta Wonder:If "barking dogs" are terrorist acts, what do SWAT teams use dogs for?

If putting women's underwear on prisoner's heads is terrorism, what do you call frat initiation parties (BTDT), Plebe Year at West Point and Annapolis(BTDT), and Boot Camp(BTDT)?

(Not to mention SERE training, previously UDT and now SEAL training, Ranger training, Airborne training, CIA training, etc.! Yep, BTDSOT -- and never "terrorized.")

many months ago, I tried to place "torture" in perspective by placing a second-hand account of SOME of the torture of Cdr. Lloyd Mark "Pete" Bucher at the hands of the North Koreans after the seizure of the USS Pueblo (AGER-2). I have been a primary source for many books on the subject and several TV shows.

The NCT editors, wisely, refused to publish it -- but it might be useful for perspective on the subjects of torture and terrorism. Normal people hearing the truth would not be able to hold food down for a week!

I have much of it on-line, free, on my website in a book I wrote on the subject of the Pueblo, but on this blog I remain semi-anonymous.

But The Shadow Knows!

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:49 PM:Nick
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:37 PM: As usual, you are so obsessed with your hatred of Conservatives...Nick I am not obssessed with hatred of ANYONE let alone the cons. Even though the cons have literally brought our county to it's knees - I don't hate THEM - I hate what they have done along with 80% of the country. Please Nick after 7 plus years - please give me a list of why I should be enamored with the cons. In fact I invite you and your con buddies to give us a list. In the mean time we libs can give you a list of what you cons have done to negatively impact our country but I don't think the editors could get through them in less than a month!

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:52 PM:Nick
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:37 PM:...If it's not the oil companies, it has to be those nasty Conservatives....Nick - just who has been in charge?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:07 PM:Fact Checker[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:39 PM: You mean that having university credentials is a requisite for this blog?
I'll show you mine if you show me yours?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:20 PM:Fact Checker[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 2:41 PM: Center on the subject. American soldiers should not be doing anything to anybody that transgresses against the rule of international law, the law of war, and the Geneva Conventions as well as Universal Code of Military Justice. American soldiers do not of their own accord threaten to sick dogs on prisoners.
Its that simple. What happens in a military prison has nothing to do what so ever to do with the real subject
You do not seem to understand that what we do makes us what we are. If give permission for ourselves or those we command to act against the law, then we become as bad as those we hold captive.
Gotta Wonder. The police swat use dogs to assault armed individuals who refuse to surrender. Prisoners are not armed but helpless before their captors. And quit with the Pueblo deal. I have a very good friend who was a POW during the Korean War and had his hair and fingernails removed, sleep deprivation, cold and heat, starvation the hold bit and almost got shipped off to China. There are always people like you that like to blow their own horn. Problem is they are fool of hot air!

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:25 PM:Fact Checker: All that frat and military questions etc. You forgot to mention that all the participants were volunteers. They were not prisoners of war. Nobody put anybody s under wear on my head when I was in the Marines or when I went thru Sigma Nu Fraternity initiation. Military college graduates will have to speak for themselves. I believe Reardon went to Canoe U so may be he will share.

Oh Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:26 PM:Talk about waterboarding, not women's underwear. That some soldiers undergo this in training says nothing about whether it's torture because the context is so different. Does the SEAL believe that his trainers may actually kill him? But a detainee does, and some detainees HAVE been killed! Waterboarding has been considered torture by all the governing bodies of world law, including the US. No, these are not very unusual times which require unusual changes in the law. The whole cold war era, we heard the same thing. No, we have to take a stand on who we are and what America's relationship to the law is. And we have to resist the desires of a President to use any human tragedy as a tool to expand his powers. The Hitler and Japan threat were infintely greater than anything al qaeda dreams of, as was the Soviet Union. What could be more obvious?

Chris to to Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:29 PM:Your comments on Israel is wrong. But again you like the rest of these Israel supporters don't do any research. EGypt was not in a position to attack Israel. What I said was reserced by me so do your own before comming out here and repeating the same old line. Israel was the aggressor. Period.

Torture and confessions wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:31 PM:Most stories I've read about torture say that it is a lousy way to get good information. Veteran interrogators for the military say so. Police people say so. Logic says so. Faced with torture continuing, you say anything to get them to stop. Might be true, might not be. Skilled interrogators don't rely on torture (including waterboarding), according to their own public statements. BTW, as a note of fact, there have been detainees who have been beaten to death as well. Does that count as torture to the apologists?

Chris to esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:33 PM:Why do you criticize what the terrorist do but you don't criticize what our troops do. You ignore the mess and all the deaths we caused and talk about barking dogs. Why.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:34 PM:Gotta: I don't want you taking my back if the balloon goes up! You are a great example of why the Draft does not work.

You may, however, buy an extra latte at Starbucks. Enjoy!

Torture in summary wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:36 PM:To my mind, stretching the law or violating the laws that deal with excessive use of force is yet another example in a long list of ways the Bush, Cheney, and their so-called "Justice" department have treated all sorts of laws. There's a law that says a detainee facility cannot be in harm's way. But here's Abu Graib, getting mortared routinely. Another law talks about practices like waterboarding. Another says that members of the administration must keep records of whom they meet with and turn these over to the archivists. Another covers habeas corpus. Another, warrants required for wiretapping. Another with the responsibility to respond to a subpoena. The list goes on and on. It does seem that some group (how large?) of Americans simply does not believe in the rule of law, only in the rule of force. Shocking, but they have their men in the White House.

Realist wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:43 PM:Did anyone realize that if we had started strategic drilling in ANWR, the oil would be hitting the market right now? Gas prices would be dropping any time now. Alas, the two squabbling parties decided to go at each other's throats and nothing gets done.
-Realist

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:45 PM:Gotta: Check out my academic cv with Alf. Show him yours and I'll check back with him.

Only Alf and DD have been previously "outed," on this blog but they know just about everyone.

If you don't know who they are, then you are too much a Newby to know.

The rest of us try to remain as unknown as possible, although I publish a regular column in a North County newspaper under my actual name, so I am not all that hard to find.

Oh Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:53 PM:In addition to gathering selected facts, I would assume that you also like to be logical. How in the world does a case (or any number of cases) of worse torture make another case of maltreatment not torture? If people somehow came up with even more horrendous practices, would that change your examples into not-torture? Well, that's what Bush did: he decided, on his own and in opposition to law, that something that was universally considered torture to be not torture any longer. Like I always say, there are some Americans who, maybe without realizing it at all, would prefer to live in a Burmese-style military dictatorship. It's a form of leadership they seem to be most comfortable with, that seems most "right" to them. Thank God they are still in the minority.

Can you say hypocrite wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:00 PM:John McCain criticized Obama for the latter's planned trip to Europe, calling it merely political. From the Times QUOTE McCain said he did not consider Obama's upcoming visits to Iraq and Afghanistan political, saying he had offered to go with Obama. But Obama's other stops abroad, he said, seemed to have a political element, particularly a planned event at Germany's Brandenburg Gate. "If he's going to have a rally at the Brandenburg Gate, which is what is being publicly stated -- of course if you have political rallies, it's a political event," he said. ENDQUOTE Meanwhile, where is the candidate McCain? From the same article QUOTE Wearing a Navy cap, McCain spoke beneath a shade tree after eating a corn-breaded hot dog on a stick purchased at "Pronto Pups," a roadside hot dog stand with a sign that said "This is Cholesterol Country -- Health Addicts, please continue on."
McCain, who had advocated a summer-long suspension in the federal gasoline tax to no avail, said U.S. lawmakers should consider whether an even longer suspension could be needed to give drivers relief from $4-a-gallon gasoline. ENDQUOTE Now there's an admirable guy with a lot of integrity! LOL Lucky for him, only "elitists" can grasp the irony of this situation.

Apollo wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:19 PM:Re: Fact Checker (3:45 p.m.)
I don't know Alf's off-line identity, but I do know DDWIZ, who does have personal acquaitance (or better) with most of the liberals. As for those two being the "only" two who have been "outed," don't forget SDRaoul and Chuck, who also both have been identified by association with their letters that have been printed.

And for the tinfoil brigade identifying a "Bilderberg" meeting in May 2005, it reminds me of a time when Martin Luther King was not so universally regarded as he was today, and someone said he had been a communist (he wasn't) and for "proof" showed me a photo of him at a communist training camp. All the picture showed was King at a desk with several other people. It could have been anywhere, any time. There was no evidence of this being a "communist training camp." In the same way, the tinfoil crowd cites an event that Kissinger shows up at and, in circular reasoning, says that since he is part of some weird international communist conspiracy (with no proof), since he was there, it was a meeting of the conspirators. And around and around the circular logic-mobile.
Just because a bunch of old has-been former leaders and younger wannabee leaders get together doesn't prove anything.
And the only "conspiracy" about the price of gas is when you get oilmen in the White House (Bush, Cheney, Rice), all oil people, and in the top three international positions of the government, concealing the records of their secret meetings with their long-time national and international oil cronies, just before the price (and profits) of oil triple. But, no, that couldn't possibly be a conspiracy.
Must be the darn liberals who have been effectively neutered since RFK was shot in 1968.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:24 PM:To Question: This analysis from the NYTimes before the decision (November 21, 2007) may answer your question:

(Quote)The Supreme Court last looked at the Second Amendment nearly 70 years ago in United States v. Miller, a 1939 decision that suggested, without explicitly deciding, that the right should be understood in connection with service in a militia. The amendment states, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The justices chose their own wording for what they want to decide in the new case, District of Columbia v. Heller, No. 07-290. The question they posed is whether the provisions of the statute “violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes.”

The court’s choice of words is almost never inadvertent, and its use of the phrase “state-regulated militia” was somewhat curious. The District of Columbia, of course, is not a state, and one of the arguments its lawyers are making in their appeal is that the Second Amendment simply does not apply to “legislation enacted exclusively for the District of Columbia.” (Unquote)

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:31 PM:Gotta: Just to get the jump on jvc who takes great pleasure in outing Reardon: Fact Checker aka Reardon; aka Greener Than Gore (and Arnold); aka A. Rose; and other names soon coming to a blog near you.

To The Lemming List wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:56 PM:There has been much made of the “peer review” of those questioning Global Warming.

May I suggest the American Physical Society Journal (Think “Physics”) of July, 2008, and an article titled, ‘Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered (Abstract) By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley.

The first few paragraphs are cited as a literary “hook.”

(Quote)The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) concluded that anthropogenic CO2 emissions probably caused more than half of the “global warming” of the past 50 years and would cause further rapid warming. However, global mean surface temperature has not risen since 1998 and may have fallen since late 2001. The present analysis suggests that the failure of the IPCC’s models to predict this and many other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of the three factors whose product is climate sensitivity:
1. Radiative forcing ΔF;
2. The no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter κ; and
3. The feedback multiplier ƒ.
Some reasons why the IPCC’s estimates may be excessive and unsafe are explained. More importantly, the conclusion is that, perhaps, there is no “climate crisis”, and that currently-fashionable efforts by governments to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions are pointless, may be ill-conceived, and could even be harmful. (Unquote)

To Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 4:57 PM:Egypt had kicked out the UN Emergency Force that was maintaining the Sinai as a buffer zone. After kicking them out Egyptian forces took up positions in the buffer zone, and closed a waterway to Israeli traffic; acts of war. You try so hard to fit everything to your hatred of America and her allies, isn’t it time for you to go watch DN?

SOLON wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:31 PM:-- Big Pharma --
Good dialogue between Nick (11:45 AM) and Alf about Big Pharma.

Perhaps the reason the Unites States consumes almost half of the global pharmaceutical market is because we are a sick society.

Alf wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:44 PM:Well, "SOLON" at 5:31PM, we most certainly are not the healthiest society, both in terms of physical health and in terms of political health. We have "leaders" whose idea of "leading" is to try to shred the Constitution while feeding the military/industrial complex and oil companies virtually everything they want via this "War" in Iraq, except, of course, aftercare for our American Troops who manage to come back from Iraq alive. Regards, Alf.

To The Lemming List wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:45 PM:Just wondering if we can get a statement from DD, who has already come off his “unanimous scientific agreement” to something a lot less damning.

This from today’s newspaper “Daily Tech”

“The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming ‘incontrovertible.’”

Anyone can play, but DD seems to be the Lemming Society spokesman.

Alf wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:50 PM:P.S. to "SOLON", we are a society that insists on a pill for everything instead of modifying our eating habits and lifestyle. Being sedentary and over-eating are two of the biggest problems we face health-wise. BTW, the most common symptom of heart disease is death. Thought I'd try to cheer you up. Regards, Alf.

A LIBERAL CONVERSATION wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:54 PM:Just a sample of the Liberal thought process:
Mark
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:35 AM:Chuck I know neoconservatives like yourself have trouble understanding how the world functions,
OBAMACAN
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:02 AM: guess what, little man, little insecure man, no one here is trying to impress you.
Chris
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:08 AM:I see our flyboys killed another eight civilians in Afghanistan.
Mark
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:46 AM:Ron,
In typical fashion you don't pay attention.
Oh esteban
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 1:44 PM:I'll be happy to answer any other difficult questions you may have.

to hardtack wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:57 PM:hardtack says: Kristie Young asks: “Does anyone really believe that a single company needs $160 billion a year in profit to survive?”

I don’t know, and I don’t think Kristie does, either. Not being an oil company insider, I don’t know what their R&D, real estate, building, equipment replacement, technical, administrative and legal budget runs, annually – but I can see $160 billion is possible."

hardtack, do you really not know the difference between "profits" and "operating expenditures"? The profits she is talking about buys the antiques, trips, girls, girls, girls, personal overseas investments, etc. etc. etc. Nothing wrong with a little fun money, we all enjoy it, but is it necessary for them to have gold toilets while everyone else is suffering?

And don't bother to call me a communist or a socilist or a marxist or a hippy either, Ron. I don't care what you think.

Okay Dokay wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:12 PM:I hope Bush doesn't expect me to obey the law either, 'cause I'm as good as he is. Thanks George, for setting the precedent.

To Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:17 PM:Hello Reardon.

To Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:29 PM:What will you do tomorrow, you scallywag? Come back as Ego Boy?

WHAchaaaa!

Greener Than Gore wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:29 PM:To To Hardtack: I care what you think! What do you think about the American Society of Physics questioning Global Whatever?

To A Liberal Conversation wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:33 PM:Try using the google to find the definition of the word "context", Reardon, and try again. Thanks for playing.

Ms M wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:33 PM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM:...The news is reporting that "Dozens of catfish walk through Florida neighborhood". I'm not sure what that's all about, but, do you know why there has never been a fatal alligator attack in Boca Raton or Paf8.

I think the editors have a sense of humor - it just won't go away LOL!

To the Lemming List and To To the Lemming List wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:34 PM:Good grief, now Reardon is posing questions and answering himself! This grow more interesting every day! Witness the melt down of the neoconservative movement.

To Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:37 PM:Sorry, I didn't know that was your stick. Accident. Won't do it again. I read your posts and I respect you.

GAY MAN wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:37 PM:GAY MAN
---- How peculiar that Chuck would give liberals credit for the new Bush AIDS bill for $48 billion (Not $46 billion, as stated by Chuck). Bush was pushing to get this bill passed. It was his baby, probably his last chance to have at least one benevolent act in his legacy. This perhaps the first time in eight years I can applaud George W. Bush.

Obviously Chuck (5:00 AM) does not know that the Republicans were very much in unity with the Democrats on passage of the AIDS bill, and even tried to name the bill after their race-baiting, gay-hating Senator, the late Jesse Helms of North Carolina. That outrageous ideas was quickly shot down, however, and the bill passes overwhelmingly with bipartisan support.

Hreener Than Arnold wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:38 PM:Third straight day of massive oil price drops since the president announced his intention to drop the executive branch to drilling.

Of course it is a coincidence! Certainly it is! Honest!

(The eventual cost of gasoline changes two and a half cents for every dollar of change at the well-head.)

Really wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:40 PM:Chucks been blogging here since 1969! That explains one heck of a lot. Time to get off the chair and into the real world, hunny.

esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:44 PM:Chris, I criticize the terrorists instead of us because we don't have a policy of strapping bombs to our chest, then walking into a children's day care center. They do. That's what makes us better than those sub humans. You need to deal with that.

esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:45 PM:Of course the surge worked, you anti Americans. But that doesn't mean Iraq is ready to stand on its own. So there is no having it both ways. You libs will bend anything to fit your own warped beliefs.

SOLON wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:47 PM:== What’s going on with oil? ==
Oil has suddenly dropped the last two days, for whatever reason is anyone’s guess. Was it a bubble that is exploding?

Are the markets less nervous now that Bush is talking about pulling troops out of Iraq, a rich oil nation, and redeploying them in Afghanistan, which has no oil?

Are the markets less nervous that Bush has decided to talk to the Iranians, named by him as one of the “Axis of Evil”?

If the oil markets continue their retreat, America should pursue with an active strategy to really bust the bubble by releasing massive amounts of oil from our strategic reserves, and catch the market manipulators with their britches down and give them a good caning. Then after the market bottoms, we can resume building our reserves again. We must be pro-active in this war.

Apollo wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:56 PM:Re: Fact Checker (3:45 p.m.) and Apollo [Me!] (4:19 p.m.)
Mea culpa! Mea maxima culpa!
In my blog responding to "Fact Checker" I mentioned a couple more names that had been "outed" but can't believe I missed my good friend Three D (3D) who occasionally pops in here, but is best known to those who regularly peek into the "Faith and Values" religion letters and web comments. Anyone who regularly checks those pages knows who 3D is in the off-line world, and I especially can't believe I missed it this week, when a few of us have received advance copies of his newest book, in advance of its release to general markets. I got my copy, and like it says on the back cover, this is Bible study like they never taught you in Sunday school!
Congrats to 3D and, again, Mea culpa! Mea maxima culpa!

sdraoul wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:07 PM:I guess the Obamanuts missed my response yesterday to them when they claimed McCain had made many
Flip-flops."

Changing a 2000 position in 2008 is not a flip flop, especially when the evidence of tax cuts producing record revenues is on hand which it wasn't in 2000. This was a wise move and most economists other than Paul Krugman agree that tax cuts historically produce more revenue, in this case RECORD revenues.

McCain was absolutely right and certain Clinton generals were wrong about he number of troops necessary in the Iraq invasion. The war was won in three weeks with fewer than 130,000 troops. No one with a brain can argue with that.

The occupation is another thing. Mistakes were made especially when Bremer dissolved the Iraqi Army. We should have used it to keep control, we didn't and that was a mistake.

But, we corrected that mistake when we kicked up the number of troops to calm the country down and we did and the situation calmed down. Violence is down, casualties are down and the Iraqi government has accomplished each and every goal set by congress with three exceptions with one of them a petroleum law.

BUT, that issue has been handled in their budget, leaving two goals to be accomplished.

Considering we didn't allow the Germans to even have their own currency for ten years after they surrendered, Iraq is a miracle. Sure, Iraq wants a “timeline” but it obviously is longer than Obama’s and that has been confirmed by my sources in Jordan. It isn’t fiction, if they wanted 16 months they would be saying so publicly.

The surge has worked and Obama opposed it by name from the beginning. He actually tried to convince people to drop everything in Iraq and leave by March of 2008, last March. He has been totally wrong since he first opened his mouth on Iraq back in 2002.

How dare he give a so-called speech against the war (only because his black constituents opposed anything Bush did) when he didn't have a single sentence about Iraq from any intelligence agency to base an opinion on? He is the Jeanette Rankin of 2008.

He spoke out because his black constituents actually believed 9/ll was a Bush planned attack and they still do. Listen to almost any black caller into talk radio about 9/11.

Most blacks think 9/11 was a Bush plan to take control of the country as a dictator. Obviously Obama agreed with his constituents like “Goddam America” Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Obama is Coming wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:18 PM:Expect a major initiative on Global Warming, Energy Independence and Job Creation announced by 0bama sometime in August - an initiative comparable to the Manhattan Project and the Space Race.

You just heard the preview of it by Al Gore.

0bama'08. Yes we can. And we can do it in 10 years.

We are Americans.

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:19 PM:Fact Checker
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:34 PM: If this is addressed to me, I will answer. The men with whom I served in active combat never had a problem with me keeping their back or they keeping mine. Your hot air is evident. Gotta wonder about blow hards like you on this blog or in actual life. You say that you can be found easily identified as you write for the NCT. That is not true. I can not identify you by any column. So, my estimation of your character will remain negative.
Face to face anytime. Gotta Wonder.

Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:27 PM:Liberal Conversation was NOT me. I am happy to take credit/blame for what I do.

But I am To the Lemming List. The Lemming Group must be holding a meeting to see what to do about the rapidly falling stock of Global Warming.

Question for esteban wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:38 PM:Do you believe that the Iraqis and the Iraqi government should have a say in when they are ready to take over running their country? Just curious.

To SOLON wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:38 PM:See Greener's 8:34 a.m and 6:47, with many exchanges in between.

To Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:44 PM:I think as usual, you got it wrong.

What you are quoting is the same document that the entire APS has denied on their home page.

The APS disavows it and the article clearly states that it does not represent the opinion of the APS. Quote it all you want. It isn't something that helps your position because, as stated before, it is not the opinion of the APS.

Greenergy wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:48 PM:Give. Me. A. Break., "To The Lemming List" at 5:45 p.m.
DDWhiz was talking about peer-reviewed academic and scientific journals of the kind that would get a listing in Google Scholar (if you even know what that is).
It does not refer to amateur blogs and publications funded by oil companies.
Give it a rest. The only "lemmings" are the ones who insist on continuing to befoul the environments they live in to slake their addictions to oil from terrorists as they fall victim to the propagandists with the deepest pockets.

Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:54 PM:To Gotta: Reading skills are not one of you strong points. I did't say I was a regular columnist for the NCTimes, I said "I publish a regular column in a North County newspaper under my actual name" -- although i did actually start my writing career at the Escondido Times-Advocate, and have published in the NC Times.

Keep John Corcoran's literacy program in mind.

Next wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:55 PM:To A Liberal Conversation
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:33 PM: Not Reardon, Try again!!

Gay z in to my eyes wrote on Jul 17, 2008 7:59 PM:GAY MAN
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:37 PM: Your yesterday's news, Catch up!!

Did I win wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:02 PM:To A Liberal Conversation
[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:33 PM:Try using the google to find the definition of the word "context", CONTEXT, A letter written from jail.

hardtack wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:03 PM:“To hardtack” ( 5:57 PM), thanks! Its encouraging to know, once in a while, that someone actually reads my stuff.

As regards how Big Oil spends their “profits,” I’ll leave that up to you, Kristie, and Big Oil shareholders.

I would much rather read your response to the second point of my 10:09 AM post. How do our legislative and executive branches of federal government go through $3 trillion each year? Do you suppose its trips, girls, girls, girls, personal favors to union or environmental lobbyists, fun money, gold toilets, $200 hammers, bridges to nowhere while everyone else is suffering?

Greener Than Gore wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:07 PM:Greenenergy, please also keep joh Corcoran's literacy program in mind.

The APS Journal IS on Google Scholar! It was not me who said that the entire society had changed it's tune -- my position is that there is a peer-reviewed article in a Google Scholar publication that did hold that view.

Comprende?

Focal Point wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:14 PM:Realist[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:43 PM:
Hindsight is 20/20. What oil company would have been drilling in ANWAR ten to fifteen years ago. It was cost prohibitive and unprofitable.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:17 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM
This was the best blog of the day.

N Word Alert wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:19 PM:"N" Word Alert, Thanks to the Good Rev. Jackson. Now we can no longer say or eat Nuts, At this rate, we will run out of "N" words by the year 4515. Don't mock the messenger

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:21 PM:Fact Checker[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 3:45 PM: Who is Alf? But, I do not need to show Alf mine. All I have is a BA from San Diego State University 1970. Never had a reason or an inclination for further additional education. The library served that purpose. Now, do I need a Masters in Journalism to stay on this blog?

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:23 PM:To Gotta Wonder[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 6:37 PM Apology accepted. Thank you for your honesty and blog.

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:28 PM:Once again, a report from a Mexican newspaper, translated and published by the M3 Report -- by Retired Border Patrol Agents;

(Quote)El Universal (Mexico City) 7/17/08

- This paper accessed “restricted circulation” reports of the DEA which show that the Sinaloa and Gulf narcotraffic cartels have contacted extremist groups in Iran to send “elite” thugs, mainly ex-military, to that country to receive training in weapons and explosives and that these contacts go back to 2005. Reportedly, they travel to Iran via flights from Venezuela. In Iran, the Revolutionary Guard furnishes advanced training in command, control, rockets, automatic weapons, sniper rifles and explosives.
The Juarez cartel reportedly gets its training from Colombia’s FARC. Further, that some terrorist group members have married Mexican women and have changed their Arabic names to Hispanic ones which has allowed them to enter the United States.
- In Sinaloa, two car bombs were turned over to the “PGR” (Mex. Dep’t. of Justice) by the army. One had three gas cylinders of ten kilos each; the other had two gallons of gasoline.(Unquote)

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:48 PM:From the San Fransisco Business Times, tonight:

(Quote)Oil company BP said Monday it will begin drilling in the Liberty oil field off the north coast of Alaska in an area not covered by drilling bans. The company expects to find 100 million barrels of oil and hopes to start producing oil by early 2011. (UnQuote)

Please note:Less than three years!

Fact Checker wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:10 PM:To Gotta: Your credentials are minimal, but satisfactory. :-)

Remediation in comprehension is still recommended.

Chuck wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:23 PM:>>Chuck[-] wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM
This was the best blog of the day.>>> It would have been better had they printed the the rest of it

Chris to to Chris wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:28 PM:As I said Israel was making overtures to attack Syria and Egypt was taking up positions. But they were not in position for an attack and wouldn't unless Israel attacked Syria or Egypt. Quite frankly I am sick and tired of all your nonsense about my hatered for Ameria and her Allies. I only hate people for their attrocities and quite frankly am tired of people who don't do their homework. Israel was threatoning an Arab state so what would you do? We attacted a state that did nothing and was not trying to do anything to us.Now your comment about Jack boots. Maybe that is the sound of 150,000 of them stomping around Iraq. Oh, but it belongs to American troops so that is alright. As I said I am sick of people talking about my hate when it is the atrocities I hate. But as far as I am concerned you and your ilk just love to denegrate people who dont fall in line with your militarism.

Oceansideer since wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:32 PM:To David Barrett:

Get your facts and figures right before you bad month the Board of Trustees of OUSD.

SBT is not the only charter school in Oceanside.

SBT has been in financial trouble since day one of its inception.

Research before you put your fingers to the keyboard.

Reardon wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:54 PM:Chuck: Really great how you mamaged to keep you post before our eyes all day long by setting the DTG way back in 1969!

To hardtack wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:40 PM:Oh I read everybody, except Ron, and only cause he talks too much about himself.. but even though I am not necessarily of the same opinion as you I still enjoy what you have to say.

To Did I Win wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:42 PM:Good one! You win. :)

To hardtack wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:46 PM:And yes, I agree with your second premise, the government wastes a humungous amount of my money and your money on stuff I don't want them to spend it on and I am mad as hell. That doesn't let Big Oil or Big Pharm or Big Banks (although they anit doing so hot these days) off the hook either.

I realize that we can all complain, and we can write our representatives, for all the good that will do, and we can do our best to be educated to vote, but what we really need is (insert emphatic swear word here) LEADERSHIP. I pray for good leadership daily. I hope our needs are answered.

SOLON wrote on Jul 17, 2008 10:50 PM:== I Read most of OIL blogs from Greener and others ==

I am still baffled by what is going on. TALK about drilling on the OCS, and TALK about Nuclear generation is mainly TALK and no new energy will come online before the next 10-12 years. And When the OCS oil does come online, it will supply only six months demand for this country. Market manipulators are almost always more short-sighted than 10-12 years. It is true, of course, that rumors and talk do affect the markets.

Maybe T. Boone Pickens mega investment in wind generated electricity is spooking the oil markets. He will be online in less than three years, and the cost of wind will not be going up whereas nuclear and gas generated electricity will escalate. But we must not forget that almost no electricity is generated with oil. Electricity generation comes mainly from natural gas and coal.

I always appreciate and the insights and logic of the Wiz most when it comes to energy discussions. I rarely comment on this subject, because I have no background in the matter.

I still think toning down the war rhetoric with Iran has much effect on the oil markets. Perhaps Iran did they smart thing by firing those nine missiles, causing the Bush brain to wake up to the real possible results of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz.

nct wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:14 PM:Just goes to show Chuck's news is old news, years behind the time, haha.
Why is it staying at the back of the posts, if it is in chronological order shouldn't it be the first post of the day?

Translator wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:22 PM:SDRaoul published fiction writer at 7:07 p.m. in badly in need of translation services from Raoulese into English for non-dittoheads.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, in Raoulese translates into English as:
Obama bad, Bush/McCain good - Obama fine-tuning small changes as he said he flexibly would = 666 devil worship but McCain making major changes in fundamental principles is no big deal.
More Raoulism. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Does anyone care?

Bill wrote on Jul 18, 2008 1:00 AM:We have some real economic dunces in this room.

Some people dont understand the difference between profit margins and total net profits.

Squeezing total profits will reduce the supply which drives prices up up and away!!!!

Gotta Wonder wrote on Jul 18, 2008 6:46 AM:Fact Checker[-] wrote on Jul 17, 2008 9:10 PM: Thank you, God.

Greencinitan wrote on Jul 18, 2008 7:31 AM:If I lived in Vermont, I'd want to know if my energy supply was clean and green because if it's not, my lifestyle in Vermont is seriously threatened by climate change. I'd much rather invest in solar panels and wind energy that won't run out and don't require monthly payments to oil companies.

Ruth Paxinos Pa. wrote on Jul 18, 2008 7:32 AM:I have been watching with interest the unfolding story of the beautiful city of Escondido, Ca. in it's attempts to get a handle on it's illegal immigration infestation. Having grandchildren in the surrounding area, I have visited Escondido many times and thought it would be a wonderful place to retire. Please keep working on following government laws on illegals, even if the federal govt. does not. Not just Escondido and Ca. residents are watching. Good luck.

To Chris wrote on Jul 18, 2008 7:46 AM:From what I read of your comments, you only classify deaths in conflict areas as atrocities if you can somehow relate them to US policies or the policies of US allies. You have made repeated derogatory comments against your country and its armed forces, and you seem to base them on your recent awakening to history and world events. Branch out in your learning and you might come to realize that there is a lot of gray between the black and white. You might even wonder why the likes of a Soros backs your favorite news source, is it because he wants the truth out there or because he wants divisiveness?

esteban wrote on Jul 18, 2008 8:33 AM:Answer to "a question for esteban"...absolutely...but we should have a say too. Thanks.

Alf wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:08 AM:The NCT letters for the 18th are listed with the Faith and Values letters. They did it again.

question for esteban wrote on Jul 18, 2008 10:55 AM:Why should we have a say, other than in terms of the tactical problem of leaving safely? Why should the US have the right or power to even have an opinion about how long we stay, or how many we leave there, or anything concerning Iraqi control over their own country? Do we own Iraq in some way?

esteban wrote on Jul 18, 2008 11:34 AM:We don't own Iraq, but leaving before we think they are capable of standing alone would be foolish and all our efforts up til now (whether you like the war or not) would be for nothing. That is what the libs don't understand. They think we are there just to occupy another country and to rape and pillage. Like it or not, we are there now, and we must be responsible with our exit. We owe it to them and the dead. Don't take this comment as me being a big fan of GWB, cuz I'm not on many fronts.

esteban I disagree wrote on Jul 18, 2008 2:19 PM:Your analysis of our leaving Iraq is based on the idea that the only question is when we think they are ready. Maybe the Iraqis have more than this question in mind. Maybe they think that the benefits of having us out of their country are important to them, maybe as important as whether they are as ready to take over security as we want them to be. I thought that the reasons we were there, one after another, all were Iraq-centered. To get rid of Saddam, to give them democracy, to leave when they say we should, to stand down when they stand up. In other words, if we are honorable people, we recognize that what happens to Iraq is up to the Iraqis, plain and simple. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? You say we wouldn't want to have wasted what er've done there. No, of course not, but if that's what they want, that's what we have to respect. It's not their job to make us happy, esteban. We have the right, as their ally, to express our concern about leaving at a time that is, in our opinion, too early. But that's advice. It's their call, 100%. If we are honorable.

Alf wrote on Jul 18, 2008 2:24 PM:Well, "esteban" at 11:34AM, the real point is that if you don't screw it up in the first place, you don't have to fix it in the second place. McGWB wants to "stay the course" set by GWB, that is continuing to foul things up with ill-considered military moves, no matter what the cost of lives or money. If he does that, if he goes after Iran while stupidly insisting that "we'll decide when Iraq is ready for us to leave (wink, wink, we'll never leave)", you can bet every last cent you have (McGWB will see to that) that our military will not be able to maintain a war on 3 fronts (Iraq, Afghanistan and Iraq) and what's left of our economy will collapse. Regards, Alf.

Herb wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:44 PM:Concerning the link and all sources of future energy: It has been shown here in 2008 that congress has been responsible for our present energy problems. Our elected representatives and senators have done nothing but kiss up to special interest people and groups and have put us in a catch up mode as far as energy is concerned. We are at least 15 years behind.
Solar energy promises to be our best bet for an energy source about 10 years from now. However, at present most homes have not been built to support enough of the current solar cells to provide total electricity of a home. The electricity hogs in a home, such as refrigerator, air conditioner, water heater, would have to be changed over to natural gas if they are not already there.
The performance of solar cells are being improved every day and it is estimated that within five years the weight problem will have been solved and we will be well on our way to solving the remainder of the problem to a point 20 years from now solar can be our main source of energy.
It is clear to all of us that oil, coal, nuclear can not last forever. It is also clear that while we are developing sources such as solar, wind, the tides, etc we must have energy. We must drill for oil whereever it is, build nuclear where we can, and us our coal to an advantage. We must stop dragging our feet and giving our country away.
SDG&E has for a long time been working on geothermal as a source of energy in the Imperial Vally. They have recently proposed a 1000 mirror solar energy plant in that valley that would use the power link to provide San Diego county with that energy along with electricity from the grid and other sources.
When, and if, solar ends up our main source of energy, we will use about one percent that is available at any given time.
We should get busy or our grand children are going to beat us with their shoe for being so stupid and putting them in a very bad place all around. We may not be able to correct some of our bad moves, such as Social security and Medicare that we spent on such things as the bridge-to-nowhere, but we can correct the energy problem if we get busy now and make some smart moves.

esteban wrote on Jul 19, 2008 4:25 AM:Alf...ever the pessimist. have a brew...it works for me!

Alf wrote on Jul 19, 2008 5:04 PM:Well, "esteban" at 4:25AM on the 19th, I would if I could. But, as much as I love a brew and I mean this with all sincerity, "one is too many and a thousand is never enough". I am left with doing what Snoopy does, drown my sorrows with root beer. Regards, Alf.

esteban wrote on Jul 19, 2008 7:04 PM:Alf...when you said do what Snoopy does...for some reason, I was thinking you are doing what Snoop Dogg does. Thank God I caught myself.

Chuck wrote on Dec 31, 1969 4:00 PM:The news is reporting that "Dozens of catfish walk through Florida neighborhood". I'm not sure what that's all about, but, do you know why there has never been a fatal alligator attack in Boca Raton or Paf8