John wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:35 AM:A number of letter writers today say we can not drill our way out of our energy problems. They are correct. Drilling alone is not the answer. But we need to do everything including drilling to tackle this problem. No of the other approachs alone will solve the immediate problem. But for gosh sakes lets do something.

Peter wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:37 AM:The Minutemen, an anti-illegal-immigration group, have joined with a political action group called Stop Taxing Us to oppose Proposition A, a $589 million Tri-City Healthcare District bond measure. Vote NO

Bill wrote on Jul 31, 2008 3:57 AM:The quality of the NCT dwindles with each letter they publish from nutcases that call for impeachment and arrest of the president and his staff.

Third worlds news source.

Not much different than Al Jazeera.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:18 AM:Being a parent of several young men who went through ALL forms of education, public, and private. I'd say it comes down the the motivation of the individual student.
It is understandable that Sorab Ghandhi would want to defend his college, his professorship. He might be one of the good teachers. Plenty of teachers & professors who should have gotten out of the game long ago.

Whether the school does a good job, is a complete red herring, I think. I've seen terrible schools, filled with lack luster teachers and a small sliver of kids still doing well, while the majority suffers.

But let's focus on his next statment: "...often at a much lower cost to the student."

Another untruth, and sadly stated by this professor. Sir, public institutions are subsidized by the taxpayers. Clearly, to the student there is a lower tuition cost, but that is not a fair comparision. And you know this.

And for what they actually teach in ungraduate classrooms, I bet a teacher could do as well with a stick in the dirt, without the very high overhead of staff, structures, and programs.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:31 AM:I see Darrell Beck is again hitting on all cylinders today.

But let's pin-point his statement about peer-review, shall we?

"These scientists then get together at international conferences, where they endorse each other's papers, thus creating peer-reviewed conclusions allowing them to claim we will all die if we continue burning fossil fuels."

This is the scam of peer-review as it exists for climate change/global warming, which ever you prefer. It is a type of group think. An echo chamber, if you will.
A small, but very radical group of elitists have been the gatekeepers disallowing, or outright rejecting any evdience to the contrary.
You see, this is the dirty little secret. When a jealous reviewer/gatekeeper of scientific publications see's data, theory, or evdience that conflicts with his own, he elects to not peer-review the paper. Thus, they can say, it's not peer-reviewed.
This then forces these scientists to other, less elite publications, which are less known, and read less. In short, they push them off into oblivion.
When you don't get published, or are forced to publish in one of these lesser known journals, you don't get the recognition, or the grant money needs to continue your own research.
This is the other dirty secret as to why elite gatekeepers, as scientists themselves, would deny publication to a new scientist that would, shall we say, Out shine them. Thus getting "his" grant money.

It clearly is publishing malpractise, and scientific malpractise.

Clearer now?

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:40 AM:I think J. Howard Crews is out of his league here with any comparison between nuclear & wind power. All power/energy power systems have flaws, but we know nuclear works, it's clean, and consistant. Far more than wind power, that needs a 90% redundacy back up, usually from a coal fire plant.
I have no problem with wind power, I say, let's build them here, build them now, and let's pay less.
But, the wind is not a constant, and will need to be backed up by a redundant system. I'd like that system to be nuclear.

But, it's seem's that Mr. Crews is overlooking the obvious. We will not be allowed to build either, because we need to have a power grid to dispurse the electrical power. The local kookers will not allow either, because they have this "thing" about power lines.
Heck, even Al Gore acknowledged we need to rebuild our current 46 year old power grid. We gotta have some way of moving that power from the point of generation, to the consumer.
But, the Kooker's in the enviro crowd won't allow it. They won't allow it from a nuclear plant, and the will not allow powerlines to be run from a wind generating site.
and that's just the cold hard facts.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:49 AM:Two things about Merrill Edelstein's letter today.

Have you noticed, as I have. That most of these lib's are willing to give the Democrats who not only voted for this war, but also kept reauthorizing the war each and every year. Even after 2006, when they said they'd bring it to an end?

Merrill 77 Senators & 296 Congressmen voted to allow the President to go to War. That's why the resolution was named: "The Authorization of the Military Use of Force in Iraq" resolution.


As to her thinking that THIS war is bankrupting the country. BALONEY!!!
Welfare is bankrupting this country, and a Government with out of control spending is bankrupting this country.
This is why I always bring up the fact, that had we not gone into Iraq, or even Afganistan, we wouls still be borrowing at least $200 billion just to support our failing welfare state.
The cost of both these wars could have been easily compensated for, they are 5% of our total budget. Entitlements take up 60%, going to 70% by the end of the next President's term, or 2012, for the public school educated.

Look at what former GAO David Walker is saying, check out the Peterman website. They have a free booklet laying out all the details.

Big Bad John wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:40 AM:McCain thinks women don't matter: Sounds like John wants men to keep having their fun and to keep women barefoot and pregnant. Way to go, John. You must be a hit with NOW.

Good news for yahoos wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:43 AM:Surprise, everyone! Exxon posted its largest profits in history last quarter. Seems like those skyrocketing gas prices served them quite well, quite well. While all of us were rearranging our lives to cope with the price of gas, they were rolling in dough, whining about how we won't give them more sites to drill on our dime.

Randy wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:58 AM:"Invest in Health Care"- Today you can vote YES on Prop. A. Ensure quality care is available for you, your children and your grandchildren when it's needed!

Patriot wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:17 AM:Is Edward Sifuentes on vacation this week? I don't see any article about ICE's new test program called "Operation Scheduled Departure" which is our government's attempt to get the estimated 572,000 non-criminal fugitive illegal aliens, those eluding a final removal order, a chance to self-deport. Like most government programs it is poorly thought out, offering no real incentive for most to sign up. If there is no promise of an opportunity to apply to immigrate legally after returning home, most will probably stick around.

Randy wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:24 AM:Now if Exxon would do right by the Valdeez victims before they all pass away...

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:30 AM:Now? Did I not write about this just the otherday? Amy Krescanko says, she is "Losing faith in Democrats."
Well, duh!!!!

Here Democrat leadership, are ya gettin a load of this?
QUOTE: "It disgusts me that the Democrats in Congress that I voted for let these crimes continue."

Wow!!!
Almost word for word what I said.
Who is the BIGGER criminal?
The person who does the supposed crime?
Or the person who says they KNOW he did it? Has ALL the evidence he did it.
But, does not prosecute?

It's because, it's like I said: It is not good for the Democrat party to pursue impeachment, and THAT's why it's "off the table."
Just like voting to allow Americans a vote "in their house", to have it denied by the likes of Nancy Pelosi.
Her needs, will always come before your needs.

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:32 AM:Stop Global Warming
It'll melt your Reese's.
An ad that is near and rear to my heart, seeing as how I'm addicted to Reese's.
Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:33 AM:I do like Congressman Paul's economic's, but he's just a bit kooky it seems to me on his isolationist views.
But, clearly, his economic principals are probably closer to the Founders, than most Republicans. They, unfortunately, chose to be Big Government Democrats.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:44 AM:Exactly, Rep. Darrell Issa:

QUOTE: "For decades, the environmental lobby has hampered, objected to and litigated against renewable energy projects across the nation."

Exactly!!!
We see it locally, those who would deny us clean, green power via the Sunrise PowerLink are those who say they want renewable energy.

Or we could talk about Hawaiians being denied geothermal power.

Or we could talk about Montanians being denied wind power.

The list is endless.

Fellas, ya can't have it both ways on this, ya just can't. Now, either get off the dime, or get out of the way.

Oh Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:47 AM:The Founders' economic mentor was Adam Smith. Do you think Smith would vote for Ron Paul? I don't.

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:48 AM:Well, "Ron" at 6:40AM, nuclear power is not all that clean.
One of the biggest problems after a nuclear generating station passes all hurdles, gets built and goes on-line is -
what to do with the spent fuel rods.
That's a big one.
Don't get me wrong, I want to see more nuclear power,
but it is not just NIMBYism when you have to find a place to put those spent fuel rods, they are still radioactive.
The more nuclear generators there are, the more places you need to store those rods until or unless someone can figure a way to recycle them.
A point to ponder, ja?
Regards, Alf.

Bad news for yahoos wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:55 AM:From the AP QUOTE WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled Thursday in an unprecedented dispute between the two political branches.

The House Judiciary Committee wants to question the president's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and former legal counsel Harriet Miers, about the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. But President Bush says they are immune from such subpoenas. They say Congress can't force them to testify or turn over documents. U.S. District Judge John Bates disagreed. He said there's no legal basis for that argument ENDQUOTE You know these liberal judges, legislating from the bench that the President is not above the law whenever he wishes. Doesn't the Constitution say that the President and whomever else he wishes has no accountability to Congress or the Courts? Gosh, I coulda sworn that was in there someplace. So we move on to the next step. These people take the fifth or go blank in response to every question. Justice and truth shall never be allowed to prevail, because Bush and Cheney know what the truth is, and I suspect they'd like to avoid prison terms.

Now look what Bill has done wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:57 AM:Thanks to Bill, Ron, who posts the most and the longest here, is now adding spaces between his pithy sentences (thentences?). Yes, Bill has given Ron yet another way to grandstand here, and Ron is on it. Page down, page down, page down...

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:58 AM:Well, "Ron" at 6:49AM, you say "most of these lib's are willing to give the Democrats who not only voted for this war, but also kept reauthorizing the war each and every year",
You forget that the Republicans voted along party lines and would not allow a veto over-ride, which requires a 2/3 majority in BOTH the House and Senate.
If the Democrats proposed something that did not authorize more money for GWB's Folly, he would veto it and there wasn't anything the Democrats could do -
EXCEPT give GWB what he AND CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS wanted.
Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:02 AM:Ya see how this works? I saw the testimony of T. Boone Pickens, where the guy clearly said: Drill Everywhere, and Yes, let's move quickly and decisively on accelerating deployment of all renewables we have at the same time. That was the T. Boone message.

Now, what does Christina Tillotson only pick up on? "...can't drill our way out of this mess." FROM A TV COMMERCIAL!!!!

She heard what she wanted to hear, because it fit with her own agenda.
And without reading Mr Pickens ACTUAL proposal, she then writes this letter today.

This is what were dealing with, folks.
Going out, only half armed, and half cocked.

And I will say this AGAIN for the Oil
addicted, the 24% who say they are addicted to oil. STOP!!!
If you really think your addicted, then stop. You stop, and show us by your good deeds how it's done. Who know's? We may like your bus pass idea?
But YOU stop first.

As to the Nick Liebham "Bus Pass Energy Plan", it is also the Nancy Pelosi plan, the Harry Reid plan, the Barack Obama plan. Use less, get less, live less. That's the plan.

Now, if you don't like the following, then you might want to consider their plan: Going to work, going to school, going to see your doctor, taking your sick child to see their doctor, taking your aged mother to see her doctor, picking up groceries, taking your kid's to soccer or baseball or football or basketball or hockey or softball or swimming practise, taking a vacation, driving to wish your sister well in her wedding, going to your relatives funeral, going to birthday parties, going to anniversary parties, going out to dinner, going to your child's graduation, high school or middle school, or college, providing shuttle service for your employees by van pool from the coaster...
Only partial list, but you get the drift.

Mark wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:05 AM:Ron, As a teacher I can say that you... wait for it..., are right about students having to want to succeed to find success, in school and in life. Unfortunately, many parents, who we depend on to teach life skills and lessons to their children, are not fulfilling their side of the academic process. Many parents don't enforce rules and standards for their children for fear of their child not liking them. While education has it's faults, much of the struggles we have are based not on the educational system, but on the parenting skills of many parents. Make no doubt about it, there are parents that enforce standards, educationally and socially, at home and those students do well in school. If we want to fix education, make parents more responsible for the outcome of their students. Expect more from the parents at home, and then creating and enforcing high standards in schools will be more successful. The more success a student encounters, the more likely they will find the importance of their academic endeavors.

Mark wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:15 AM:As I stated before, I wish drilling would solve the oil quagmire we are in, but common sense tells me otherwise. Exxon announced today that they have earned record profits, the largest profit ever by an American corporation. Do we really think that the Oil corporations will ever do anything to hurt their profits? They know we won't stop driving and/or using their oil, so what would be their motivation. Big oil companies own the Republican party and a healthy chunk of the Democratic party, so what would be their incentive to move forward an create alternatives they may hurt their profit margins. It is like the cigarette companies creating strategies to get people to stop smoking. Big oil is capitalism at it's best. Corporations can make BILLIONS on the backs of Americans, and Politicians and many brainwashed Americans don't see a problem with it. Until we decide to put our foot down, we have no business complaining about gas prices and/or the price of oil. We get what we ask for.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:17 AM:I hear ya, "Alf" @8:48 AM.
Once we can get rid of Harry Reid, I think we will be able to open the Yucca Mountain Repository.
And in some cases, we can reprocess nuclear waste. Hopefully in the future, we will be able to recycle all of it.

I do agree with you about NIMBYism, we need to just put it very, very plainly with some people who are resisting, either turn off your air conditioner, your TV, your washer dryer, your refrigerator, your hot water heater, or let us build these things.
I personally would be willing to go an disconnect them, if necessary.
But, that's just me.

Oh J H C wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:30 AM:I can just imagine this 10,000-year-old conversation emitting from the dark recess of some cave: “It’s too dangerous, I tell you. What good is heat and light if catches your hair on fire? It could kill all of us. I have even heard that it can burn an entire forest and everything in it. Besides that, it’s expensive – we would have to keep gathering wood for it – blah, blah, blah!”

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:33 AM:Well, "Bad news for yahoos" at 8:55AM,
Those things called checks and balances that are built into the Constitution just keep upsetting GWB's apple cart.
Of course, if GWB had his way, he would flush the Constitution down the toilet after using it for toilet paper.
Regards, Alf.

Media Matters wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:50 AM:Alf: I favor "pondering" -- but there is a great difference between pondering and obstructing.

As I noted last night, the Border Fence at Smuggler's Gulch is finally underway after 12 years of obstruction by the "Sierra Club, San Diego Audubon Society, the Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association and other local environmental groups." (June 24, SD Union)

Obstruction is the process by which the left operates. There is no greater obstructionist than Nancy Pelosi, but the "environmental lobby" will delay, obstruct and defeat any progress, anywhere, anytime at any cost.

Here in San Diego County, Democrat Congresswomen Susan Davis has a poll on her own website asking if we should drill. The answer, according to her own poll is yes -- more then 70%, but she continues to vote NO!

Obstruct, obstruct, obstruct, with just a bit of stupid misinformation thrown in. Yesterday, Obama said if we inflated our tires properly and got tune-ups it would save as much fuel as drilling would bring in!

Huh? Obviously electing a lawyer is not the same as electing an engineer!

Media Matters wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:06 AM:From The North Carolina News & Observer:

"It was only three weeks ago that John Edwards was fielding media questions on his chances of filling the Democratic Party's vice presidential slot on Barack Obama's ticket or a potential Cabinet position in an Obama administration.

On Wednesday, however, the former U.S. senator and 2004 vice presidential nominee was eager to duck the press when the questions took a tabloid turn."

OBSERVATION wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:13 AM:EXON/MOBIL/SHELL REPORTS:
"Record earnings for the world’s largest publicly traded oil company have become almost as predictable as the surge of gasoline prices at the pump in recent years, and for the second quarter income rose 14 percent, to $11.68 billion."

OBSERVATION wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:15 AM:Now look what Bill has done: Maybe Bill wants you to read between the lines?

OBSERVATION wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:17 AM:Judge: White House Aides Can Be Subpoenaed
[Judge: White House Aides Can Be Subpoenaed]
President Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled Thursday in an unprecedented dispute between the two political branches.

Right on Gandhi wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:37 AM:There is such a blind faith that "private does it better" that it's like a religion, and not even a very sophisticated religion. If anyone wants examples, all they gotta do is read about the work that private contractors have done in Iraq. Millions of dollars missing and unaccounted for. Buildings going up in smoke and personnel burned to death in electrical fires. Prisons remaining untouched for years while the corporations that were hired to build them party till the cows come home. Then we could look at the success rate of new businesses, something like 30% are still going after a year or two, 70% failed. How about our entire health care system. Its' by far more expensive than any system in the world, yet in all measures of public health, we are running about 30th or 40th in the world, all those systems outperforming us while government run. This list could go on and on. And don't forget, since Reagan, our government has mostly (20 out of 28 years) been led by Presidents who've been out to destroy government, set it up to fail in its jobs. The idea that the purer the capitalism, the better the outcome has been thoroughly proven to be a myth. In a world of honorable people, who had the integrity to balance personal gain with public welfare, I think capitalism would be the best system and would work well. Sadly, that species of human has not yet evolved.

DRILLER wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:42 AM:John at 1:35 a.m. acknowledges that "we can not drill our way out of our energy problems" but does continue to insist that expanded drilling is part of the answer to our addiction to oil. Right on, John! And part of the solution to our addiction to opiates is expanding our own operations to grow domestic poppies, and our addiction to pot that we should be planting more of those funny little plants. Just say no!

sdraoul wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:54 AM:How terriblky funny that two people complain about Viagra being covered by insurance and birth control pills not. Stupid position.

Impotency is a health issue; birth control is not, it is a choice that is just one of several options.

Birth control can come in the form of abstinance, , pills, the morning after pill, devices of one sort or another and one drug that is implanted that controls the fertilization cycle. Then, there is alsways abortion and that is covered by insurance by the simpel expedient of an abortion docter proclaiming that the health of the mother is an issue.

Of course, abortiosn are not covered by government funds as should be for I don't want my money paying for sosmething so many object to on moral grounds.

Devices and implants and the morning after are prescribed and covered as medical procedures in msot cases.

To criticize McCain for standing by a system that serves so many so well and for standing against another giveaway may make the objecters feel better and make them more willing to vote for a rock star, but it doesn't change the issue of medical procedure or not.

MY TWO CENTS wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:54 AM:Hmmm...considering that U.S. District Judge John Bates just ruled that Miers and Bolton have no immunity from congressional subpoenas, we may indeed see some further development in regards to Rove...stay tuned, boys and girls.

Ace wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:07 AM:Gimme a break Merrill Edelstein. Back yonder when I was a freckle faced innocent kid chasing bugs and varmits in the fields polititians were just as dirty. The only difference is that back in those ancient days most polititians of all party's had each others backs. These days we have the internet and more selfish polititians who would roll on their grandmothers.

Liberals nailed it again wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:08 AM:Remember how Bush was going to get the economy going with his stimulus checks? From the NY Times QUOTE The economy grew less than expected from April to June despite a huge booster shot of tax rebates, the government reported on Thursday, dimming the outlook for a quick recovery. And more bad news may lie ahead: new claims for unemployment benefits jumped to a five-year high last week, an ominous sign for the ailing labor market that could signal a further decrease in spending in the months ahead. Gross domestic product expanded at an annual rate of 1.9 percent in the second quarter, the Commerce Department said, primarily because of a surge in export sales powered by the weak dollar. The government’s tax stimulus package, which put billions of dollars into consumers’ pockets, led to only a modest rise in consumer spending, and many businesses were caught off-guard by the slowdown in sales. ENDQUOTE At the same time, ExxonMobil reported the most profitable quarter in the history of ANY American oil company. In other words, as we asserted, Bush used the pain of the American taxpayer to take a huge sum of money and give it to his oil buddies through those taxpayers, while unemployment rose and the economy stagnated. And now Bush and McCain, ever at the bidding of big oil, are persuading those same taxpayers that the oil companies need us to give them more land and sites to drill. Only ExxonMobil can save poor us, after all...Disgusting, don't you think? Don't you think so YET? What'll it take?

bogie wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:09 AM:W. David Aderholdt, make that 10,001, I'm on board with you.

Media Matters wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:13 AM:Everyone will have a different reaction to the Sun’s headline: “Sheikh flies Lamborghini 6,500 miles to Britain for oil change” but mine is, “I wish we didn’t import so much foreign oil and help feed this guy.”

Now, you know what “Big Oil” REALLY looks like, and Exxon isn’t it!

Exxon distributes its massive profits to big and small investors, but REALLY BIG OIL is the 15 national oil dictatorships that outrank Exxon and DON”T distribute their profits to “widows and children.”

Now you know what “excess profits” REALLY looks like.

eagle wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:16 AM:Good news for yahoos
[-] wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:43 AM:

That is certainly good news. If Exxon made those kind of profits can you imagine how much the feds and states raked in?

birdie wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:22 AM:Alf, I'm jealous. Last year my better half was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Since then I have been on the special diet with her for support and she is doing quite well. I now sneak an occasional Reese's but certainly miss the big bonus box from Costco.

Peace

DD Wiz wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:29 AM:The published letter from Darrell Beck, echoed with predictable megadittoes in the post from "Ron" (6:31am), plays the same old tired two-part out-of-harmony chord he has repeated over and over again: basing the entirety of his "scientific" claims on local TV weatherman John Coleman and citing the enormous financial incentives for the real peer-reviewed climate scientists.
Yet again, I need to point out that I find Coleman to be a likeable, gregarious sort. As I have mentioned before, several years ago I sat next to him on a political panel (he representing the Reform party, me representing the Democratic party) and I found him to be enormously pleasant and likeable. That said, he is not a scientist, and on his own web page does not claim to be. He is a local TV personality and that is all.
Beck, claiming to cite Coleman, again repeats his absurd claim about "billions of grant dollars [that] go to scientisits who make a career out of trying to buld a case against CO2." I repeat my very simple challenge: please cite by name these peer-reviewed academic or research scientists who have amassed the huge resevoirs of wealth from these "billions of grant dollars" of which you write. Where are all these billionaire Ph.D.'s? And please, do not bring out Al Gore and his book and movie sales. AL GORE IS NOT A SCIENTISIT, nor has anyone here ever cited him as such. He is a private citizen, investor and media personality who would be successful in any field he pursued. He even won an election for president! The thing that really rankles conservatives is that he proves you can be a successful entrepreneur in the private sector and still be a liberal at the same time.
In contrast, as Exxon-Mobil again reports another record profit, surpassing eachof the old record profits, I can show you exactly where the real billions are going. And the ONLY "scientists" with legitimate credentials who have made millions are those who published NON-peer-reviewed works funded by oil interests trying to debunk the real science.

JC wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:34 AM:The first comment by John deserves a response. Even T Boone Pickins says we can't drill our way out of oil dependency. I understand John's urge to do something - but drilling for more oil is like punching another hole in the lifeboat. It might make you feel like you did something, but all you will accomplish is sinking the boat faster. Petroleum is finite. Opening up more offshore drilling will only prolong the inevitable and drain valuable time and resources from developing alternative solutions.

Jack wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:42 AM:Ron,
I am so proud of you for being the first one to give up your car and have started riding a bicycle.
I am sure you have solar panels and are helping clean up the enviorment.

Cal wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:46 AM:Huffy puffy letter from Issa today. Isn't he one of the guys who assured us that Iraq would provide us with plenty of oil? I may be wrong - but I seem to recall that he was part of the political PR campaign out of DC that schmoozed us into a war in Iraq, claiming it would pay for itself with oil revenues that could even lower gas prices in the USA. Now he wants us to believe the same scam artists that brought us a war and $4/gal gas - and open up off shore drilling. Issa is ... for the petroleum industry and has made his fortune by piggy backing on the auto industry. No wonder he is for drilling. He credibility has sure been drilled full of holes.

Obama Energy Plan wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:48 AM:""We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

Obama Campaign Speech

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:56 AM:Well, "Mark" at 9:05AM, rules that are not enforced consistantly and uniformly are far worse than no rules at all, for it breeds disdain for authority.
A school that sets limits with a dress code, enforces it at the beginning of the school year and has only spotty enforcement later on, with little or no consequences for a violation teaches the children an unintended lesson - disrespect for authority and disrespect for rules because even the ones who make the rules do not respect them.
Regards, Alf.

Checks and Balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:14 PM:To Alf, The Resident Constitutional Expert Since we have three co-equal branches of government, used the "checks and balances" can:

1. The Executive Branch subpoena members of Congress to testify, and/or provide their files and records?

2. The Judicial Branch subpoena the Members of Congress to testify, and/or provide their files and records?

3. Can the Executive Branch subpoena the Members of the Judiciary (including sitting members of the U.S. Supreme Court) to testify, and/or provide files and records?

etc.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:21 PM:Now, I want you to read the wording used by "Bad news for yahoos" @8:55 AM, and then you decide for yourself, if this guy really knows what he's talking about, knows how our system of government actually works, or this is just more of the same, political campaign, as is being done right now, with a Democrat Congress trying to stay relevant when they just cut off your gas supply and distract because it is an election year?

You decide. Now, most of us have some appreciation for the law, and how it works, so just read what he wrote, and then you decide whether he knows what he talking about, OK?

QUOTE:
"The House Judiciary Committee wants to question the president's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and former legal counsel Harriet Miers, about the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. But President Bush says they are immune from such subpoenas."

Notice he said: LEGAL COUNSEL
Yes, the President has a lawyer, and lawyers are bound by their oath, under penalty of losing their law license for disclosing what was said between themselves and their client, i.e. the President.

The bottom line is this, Congress may ask, but the President does not have to agree, legally. This is what these Democrats want. They want the President to "appear" uncooperative, and undermining the legal system, when in fact, he is the one who is right here.
By protecting the rights of his attorneys to remain silent, he is protecting YOUR rights, as well.

It's funny, ya know?
These guy's say they want accountability. Ok, let's pull out... I don't know... let's pull out John Conyers Chief of Staff to, and let's allow the President to examine, and extract all of these private legal conversations that Conyers has had with his attorneys, as well.

Think that will fly with Democrats?
The Constitution?
No, Because it's a seperation of powers as demanded by the Constitution.
But, you didn't know that, until I just told you.. now.. did you? Come on, you can tell the truth here.

Here's what they can do:

"...the legislature has a supervisory role over the actions of the executive, and may replace the Head of Government and/or individual ministers by a vote of (no) confidence or a procedure of impeachment. On the other hand, a legislature which refuses to cooperate with the executive, for example by refusing to vote a budget or otherwise starving the executive of funds, may be dissolved by the Head of State, leading to new elections."

That's what they can do, and what they are giving you are Stalinist show trials, just in time for the election.
Cause for these folks, it's not about doing right, or being right, it's about power.

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:39 PM:Well, "birdie" at 11:22AM, being moral support for your wife is a very good thing. Smokes and sweets seeing are my two vices left, seeing as how I can't indulge in my other vice that goes with pizza any more. I gotta have some vcices left!
Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:50 PM:"Mark" @9:05 AM: I hear ya man, we need parents to step up. I agree!
I've seen many cases where the parent seemed to have cared less, but the student was very well motivated.
And I've seen it the other way around as well.
On top of that, you need a competant teacher. Does not mean they have to have a long string of alphabet behind their names, or half a dozen sheepkins, they need to connect with the student, identify individual student needs and desires, and help to keep them focused.

I've met these parents who leave it to teacher's to teach "life skills", they need a live skills class, in my opinion.

Backcountry wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:55 PM:No mention today about T. Boone Pickens whose big push was for natural gas to power automobiles. Wind and solar wont power automobiles; only charge batteries or generate electricity. He also was for nuclear power as well as more drilling for oil and the use of coal.

Just as Darrell Issa points out...The environmentalists are the big problem. Get them on board or out of the way and America will be fine.

Concerned One wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:58 PM:I won't go down the Darrel Beck road today, but one underlying theme I see is environmental review. By now, the EIR process has been done so many times it has to be getting easier and cheaper. Energy projects deserve a streamlined EIR, or in the case where one has been completed that is close in scope and geography, a Negative Declaration should apply. We need utility infrastructure and we need it now. Regards, C-1.

Build more nuclear plants wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:03 PM:Spent fuel rods from nuclear power facilities can be ingested by a form of extreme bacteria that was discovered recently.
It can also be locked into a crystalline structure for storage.
Get out of the way and build the power plants.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:07 PM:Alf[-] wrote on Jul 31, 2008 12:39 PM:
Deviled Eggs-Deviled Eggs-Devil Eggs.

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:14 PM:Well, "Checks and Balances" at 12:14PM,
1) NO.
2) Possibly, if and only if the person (member of Congress) is involved in a current case before the court.
3) NO.
Your questions are mere deceptions, a smoke-screen.
You see, Article 1
Powers of Congress
Section 8 says, among other things -
"To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court"
and it does not give that power to the other branches.
All I had to do was to look it up, that makes me an expert in finding things out, not an expert on the Constitution.
Regards, Alf.

Focal Point wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:18 PM:Build more nuclear plants: Extreme bacteria that can ingest spent nuclear rods. What about the human species?

to Checks and balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:18 PM:The issue isn't tit for tat, it's accountability. When judges have broken the law, yes, they are responsible and accountable, and can and have been indicted. When a congressman breaks the law, he is accountable to the law, and also, in matters of ethics, to the Congress. The President? To whom is the President accountable? How about an aide or staff person in the White House? Congress seems like the logical answer, and the courts (remember that the courts have found Bush policies illegal a number of times already). It's not a little political game of "gotcha", it's about the rule of law and the Constitution. (And while we're at it, Bush also dodged Constitutional checks and balances via his incredibly frequent use of signing statements. This power was designed so that a President could say, as he signed a bill into law, that he was unsure of the Constitutionality of the law he was signing, expressing his reservations about it. Bush has used it for altogether different purposes: to exempt himself from following the law he was signing! And he has used the signing statement more than all previous Presidents combined! Another case of avoiding the means of accountability the Founders intended.) Comprende? Or perhaps you think the President should have more or less dictatorial powers? If Obama wins, can he count on your support for similar lack of accountability and unlimited powers? If you are sure President Obama was breaking the law, would you be as supportive of his staff saying they cannot be subpoenaed? Or do you simply believe that leaders who belong to the party or ideology that you support should have a different set of laws for themselves?

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:18 PM:You know, it is truly sad to read something like this, this.. dead ended person's point of view. Have you ever run into someone like this, where the world is ending, and everythings going worng, and nothing good awaits us, only death? You ever find yourself in a conversation with a person like this? I have, and now you have.. "Right on Gandhi" @10:37 AM.

He says: "There is such a blind faith that "private does it better" that it's like a religion, and not even a very sophisticated religion."

Well, we've seen what just the opposite of this has done, it was called communism, and socialism. Where literally millions of people died, simply because they opposed the state religion, which was atheism. And many other were placed in gulags simply because they disagreed with the State, the Government.

But, we don't have this here, we have a Representative Republic, where each person is allowed, by God, to life, liberty, and their pursuit of happiness.

Now, our system while not perfect, is certainly much, much better than most.
But not to this guy, not to him. Because he is a perfectionist. A Utopian.

This is a person who is still searching for THAT society, that will make him most happy. But THAT society, is not on this earth.

So, he is left with his miserable existence, perhaps many of you who have read Søren Kierkegaard or Friedrich Nietzsche, can understand where this person is coming from.
Afterall, Existentialism says
that individuals create the meaning and essence of their lives, as opposed to it being created for them by deities or other authorities.

And IF you create your own meaning, and all you see is the bad, and you focus on it, like this person has.
I honestly do not know how he has the strength on any given day to get throught it.
Hope & Change, to the Existentialist begins with you.

Alf wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:20 PM:Devilled eggs are not a vice, "Focal Point" at 1:07PM, they are wonderful food. I think that I'll go make an egg salad sandwich, that's where I try my different recipes for devilled eggs first.
Regards, Alf.

Checks and Balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:26 PM:Alf: Then, as I see it -- there are NO CHECKS AND BALANCES!

And, there are no THREE CO-EQUAL BRANCHES.

It is as I expected.

Thank you.

Mr. Originality wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:29 PM:Alf, while I don't disagree that schools could do more in the way of discipline and enforcement, the main responsibility begins in the home.

If the kids don't show up at school wearing inappropriate clothing, there is no problem. More time to educate and less time playing enforcer.

Backwoods logic wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:29 PM:Backcountry 12:55 got it backwards. Issa is wrong again. The industrialists are the big problem. The environmentalists are problem solvers. Keep earth healthy and we all will be fine. Make the industrialists clean up and get off the petroleum addiction that is creating more turmoil than progress.

OBSERVATION wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:30 PM:SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday, trying to avoid a "full-blown" financial crisis in California, eliminated 22,000 part-time and temporary positions and ordered that 200,000 state workers receive the federal minimum wage.

Checks and Balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:31 PM:To To: As we have seen for many decades, there is no "check" or "balance" on the Supreme Court.

They are answerable to no one, and are life-appointees.

Of course there is always the French Revolution...

Focal Point wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:31 PM:Alf[-] wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:20 PM: My mouth is watering. I stand corrected.

Checks and balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:33 PM:Are you saying that you appoint yourself the person who gets to define what "checks and balances" should mean, and then if that's not what the Constitution says, you can royally declare that there are none? LOL Look, the relationship between the branches that is described in the Constitution is what Americans MEAN when they talk about "checks and balances", not your private definition. The case between the White House and the Courts and the Congress is our Constitution in action. Whether it fits your personal definition of what should be is about as irrlelvant to anything as a thing can be. Please try not to be so ridiculous. Think before you post next time.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:34 PM:I really have to laugh at how ridiculous this debate about Oil driling is becoming.
Pelosi & crew have bailed out on the American people, denying Americans a vote "in OUR house", and this guy says.. "Liberals nailed it again"
@11:08 AM.
Afterall, she's off to hock her book, and take a break, while supposedly "saving the planet."

But it just goes to show, that the ONLY way Democrats can win this fall, is IF the economy stays down. And wouldn't it Stay Down if you don't provide the energy it needs to power itself?

Exxon-Mobil should not apologise for making some money. Simply because you think it's excessive, does not make it so. All Liberals think somebody makes too much, it's part of their own DNA to look in my backyard, drooling over my swimming pool, when they do not.
That's just how they are, envious, jealous, and angry.
They see their own lives through what other's have, and then lament they do not have them too.
Not unlike the founder of their movement, Karl Marx. Who wrote this theory, because he, himself, was a mooch, a loafer, and a louse.
Seems pretty poetic that he would write a doctrine that would met his own welfare needs. As Friedrich Engels, who helped to develop communist theory alongside Marx, would subsidize Marx, while Marx's own family lived in sheer poverty because of Marx's own dislike of work. Mainly, manual labor. Kind of ironic, actually. Sweat of their brow, and all that stuff. LOL

to Checks and Balances re Supreme Court wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:39 PM:In a sense, that's right, the Justices are not accountable in their decisions to anyone except courts of the future. But the Justices are appointed by a President and confirmed by Congress. Nevertheless, by giving the Court this special power, the founders are saying that law ultimately trumps politics. Seems wise to me. When you have your own country, you can define things any way you wish, of course, or look for a country that works more in line with your preferences. Good luck to you.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:43 PM:Here's just what I need, another "Daddy"...

And it is now the official Obama Energy Plan:

QUOTE: "We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

Gee.. That's dad.

As opposed to, what Bush said a few weeks back:

QUOTE: "They're smart enough to figure out whether they're going to drive less or not. I mean, you know, it's interesting what the price of gasoline has done. It caused people to drive less. That's why they want smaller cars: They want to conserve. But the consumer's plenty bright. The marketplace works."

Thank you President Bush for treating me like an adult.

Yes, I can decide, and I'll make my own choices, thank you very little.. Barry Obama!

Oh Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:44 PM:It doesn't take much to poke you into one of your paranoid anti-communist rants, that's for sure. I wonder what the ordinary American, any person picked at random in a state as "red" as you like, would opine about gas prices and the profits of the oil companies. I'd be curious, wouldn't you? All I ask is that the interviewee not be an investor in big oil, as we know you are. Tell you what, we can even pick a person that we've screened to be sure s/he isn't a liberal, either. I'd still be curious. Meantime, I think the oil people should drill on the land they already lease before we hand over more subsidies to them. They're doing ok, after all.

Checks and Balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:53 PM:To Whomever posted at 1:33 and apparently doesn't understand "from" and "to":

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson once famously remarked, ‘We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.”

Please tell me how that meets the “checks and balances” test of the “three co-equal” branches of government?

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:55 PM:Just for those concerned with "my working" so that I pay my fair share of your monthy income...

In Auckland Friday 8:51 AM
In Hong Kong Friday 4:51 AM
and in Beijing it's Friday 4:51 AM

So, if your still keeping track..
Now ya know.

Wondering wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:57 PM:Is there ANYONE on this Blog who ACTUALLY believes:

""We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

to Checks and Balances wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:00 PM:Please see my post of 1:39. Sorry about the omission of the "to", my bad. If you feel that the three branches need to be more "co-equal", you should write to your Congressperson and suggest initiating the process of amending the Constitution. That's how we do it here.

SOLON wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:16 PM:== Nuclear NOT CLEAN ==

Ron repeats the tired old myth that nuclear energy is clean (6:40 AM). True, it is carbon-free, but only in one stage of the process. At best this claim is a half-truth.

While nuclear reactors themselves do not release greenhouse gases, reactors are only part of the nine-stage nuclear fuel cycle. This cycle includes mining uranium ore, milling it to extract uranium, converting the uranium to gas, enriching it, fabricating fuel pellets, generating power, reprocessing spent fuel, storing spent fuel at the reactor and transporting the waste to a permanent storage facility. Because most of these nine stages are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, nuclear power thus generates at least 33 grams of carbon-equivalent emissions for each kilowatt-hour of electricity that is produced.

Ron wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:16 PM:I have asked, two people in particular that I happen to care about, my folks. As I've previously stated, both Democrats, dyed-in-the-wool types, voted for Clinton twice, Gore once, and Kerry once. But will not vote for Obama, they wanted Hillary.
Anyways.. "Oh Ron" @1:44 PM, a few years ago, actually, it's more like 20 years ago, I started talking to my folks about investing, to offset what they were facing with Social Security being taxed at up to 85%.
I sold them on Oil stocks, at the time, it was a good deal to get in on, cause the stock was only going to go up.
Anyways, today, you could not tear the dividend check from my Father's cold dead hands, that's how well he has done.

Now, multiply that times the nine billion two hundred million (9200000000) shares, divided into people like my folks. Senior, retired, and able to live comfortably.

Now, what you intend to do, and what Pelosi, Reid, and Obama intend to do, is TAKE that money from my parents, to give to others, they deem more worthy.

Does that sound remotely democratic, in your mind?

The bulk of shareholders are individuals, like my folks, like myself, who invest to make some money.
So, ya really need to get off the soap box, friend. And focus, just a bit, on reality.
Exxon is not a replay of Charles Dickenson, I know how you guy's love to talk about 18th century England. Or Rockefeller, or Vanderbilt, or
Astor.
These are simple people, simply investing a life's worth of very hard work, and are doing what Albert Einstein said was the single most powerful force on the face of the earth.
Compound Interest.
Now, you gotta problem with that?

Concerned One wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:24 PM:Alf, I made a deviled egg the other night for the first time in years. Just scrunched youlk, dijon mustard and fresh from the garden diced jalapenos. I didn't have mayo, and it was pretty darn good. Regards, C-1.

Mark wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:25 PM:I hear the word Communism used alot in posts. Let me clarify for you. There is no such thing as Communism. It was an idea that Karl Marx and others had believing that a society should be more like a commune, where everyone is equal. Elected officials are not needed because the people take care of each other. It was an idea that never came to fruition. What many of you are talking about is fascism and totalitarianism. Socialism is a seperate entity that is nothing like fascism, except in the eyes of the paranoid and misinformed.
-sdraoul: To your way of thinking then, Viagra shouldn't be covered because impotency is nature's way of telling you you are done, right. Also, one of the leading reasons for impotency is obesity, which in most cases is caused by the individual, so why should we have to pay for their little blue pill, right? You never seem to amaze me with your flat out ignorance. Birth control pills are actually used for much more than birth control, even though it's primary purpose is to prevent conception. A growing problem among young women these days is a condition called endometriosis. Birth control pills are used to control the condition, which can lead to infertility if not controlled. At last check, it affects almost half of all women of child bearing age. B.C. pills have also been used to control hormonal imbalances, acne, and a vast array of other conditions. I won't begrudge anyone their little blue pill. Impotency, while not life threatening, does affect a person's quality of life. I also will not begrudge a woman birth control, for contraception or treatment of other health issues.

Checks and Balances wrote on