Jay Bookman

By Dennis

July 15, 2008 8:42 AM | Link to this

Are you certain that we would be in this exact same situation today. I agree that limiting oil recovery to just ANWR is shortsighted.

But stating that there would be absolutely no impact from having these additional sources of oil??????

Your guess about the value or impact of increased US oil production over the last ten years has absolutely no more value that the guess of Senator Voinovich.

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this

“Factual basis?” You expect a debate on drillin’ our way to energy independence to have a factual basis?

You funny, Jay!

Seriously, back in ‘04 when Johnny Isaacson was out there stumping for his first Senate term, I can recall a question from the audience about energy policy. His sole answer was, essentially, “drill in ANWR.”

There’s something phallic, I guess, about the appeal of drilling, and Republicans love them some phallic imagery.

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this

If we could run our cars on foolishness……

By the time we got to Phoenix, Bush would be decidering…

The Little old lady from pasadena would have more money for condoms….ew

This blog would be pure corn……..

There are natural oil spills where oil just seeps through the ocean floor. It’s considerable, but it’s also a part of planet formation, and earth takes it into account as it evolves. The earth takes everything into account. The earth cant do anything that’s not earth-like, and doesn’t further along the process of planet formation.

A bird cant do anything that’s not bird-like, get it?

Humans, therefore, cant do anything that isn’t stooge-worthy, and thus, with humor, we can survive.

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this

Nobody asked, but here’s my stance on drillin’ fer independence:

Yeah. Sure. Go for it. Explore in as safe and prudent a manner as is practical, where there are likely oil reserves. Maybe even offshore, or maybe even in a wildlife refuge.

At the same time, mandate very serious… no, deadly serious conservation, mass transit and alternative energy development. So serious it’s painful. That serious.

Fast track a 45 mpg CAFE for cars AND light trucks.

Mandate sidewalks and bike paths for any new construction, oh, anywhere.

Cut off federal funds for any backsliding municipality, county or state that isn’t providing bus or rail options for citizens who live in densely populated areas (I’d leave it to smarter people to determine how dense that needs to be.)

That kinda stuff. Show you’re serious about the demand side, make some serious progress on that front, and then maybe you get to drill. Not before.

Is that unreasonable? Tell me why, someone.

By TW

July 15, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this

Thanks Jay. You are correct - oil drilling has beecome July’s litmus test for finding idiots. Ever noticed those who beat their chests the loudest about WMDs are the same ones now trumpeting offshore drilling?

By reebok

July 15, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

This is a well-reasoned post, Jay, which ensures it will have no impact whatsoever on the ‘drill everywhere right now’ crowd.

By NRB

July 15, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

it’s unreasonable because it puts the government in a position of power over our lives. Furthermore, who’s going to pay for all that crap.

The free market will take care of creating higher MPG vehicles…it’s already happening and we’ll even be seeing electric cars starting in 2010.

More government rules and regulations means less freedom and more expense for all involved.

By Billy

July 15, 2008 9:03 AM | Link to this

Yeah, Dennis, except any oil expert not affiliated with the oil companies (or the Republican Party) would tell you the same. “Absolutely no impact”? You’re right, there’d be a little impact. Maybe in 2028 we’d be paying $8.05 instead of $8.10.

This is Enron. The companies know we have little choice but to pay what they dictate, so they care nothing about keeping prices affordable. Who cares if people have to choose between gas and food or medicine. Who cares if the high gas prices mean people need to get second jobs just to pay for gas. Who cares if those same people cannot afford to even look for those jobs. We’re pulling in record profits and getting billions in tax breaks!

This isn’t capitalism. It’s corporate socialism. It’s a plutocracy. They literally have us over a barrel.

By GOPs got to go

July 15, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

Hillbilly Ragger for President.

By NRB

July 15, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

And the ones beating their chests about how expanded oil drilling wont work are the same ones who claimed that “the surge” in Iraq wouldn’t work.

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

Oh, I left out my favorite mandate. Not just sidewalks and bike paths for new construction; you’ve gotta purchase right-of-way for sidewalks and bike paths if none exist on land adjacent to yours. How long would be determined by the acreage, or something.

Stuff like that.

And you could give Jim wooten a heart attack by providing disincentives for people to live in sprawly suburbs, and incentives for more urban, densely populated development, where folks can either walk, bike, take mass transit or drive short distances for most of their errrands.

Oh, and schools. No more car rider lines. Ban ‘em!

Do that, and then we drill in a wildlife refuge.

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 9:09 AM | Link to this

Capitalism: Communism with Middlemen.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this

Hillbilly ragger,

I agree completely. I’ve often said I don’t mind drilling as long as we have benchmarks in place for alternatives.

It amazes me that so much money is poured into widening our interstates when that money could be used for public transportation or commuter trains.

I think driving should become more and more INconvenient.

By ByteMan

July 15, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this

@Dennis: here’s why: because OPEC attempts to coordinate the amount their member countries supply to the open market. If we add a million barrels a day (what ANWR would produce at PEAK production), there’s no reason they couldn’t pull a million barrels of production off the market and keep the price artificially high. And considering how many billions of $$ per day they’re making on high priced oil today, that would be a smart move on their part.

We aren’t the only supplier. Other suppliers aren’t using as much oil as we are. They don’t have a vested interest in keeping oil prices low. Same as the oil companies; no vested interest in a low-price-oil world. Don’t expect relief until you force them to the table with a viable alternative.

A million barrels a day is not a viable alternative in a world with 85 million barrels per day of consumption and growing.

By T

July 15, 2008 9:15 AM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger

Sounds good to me.

By JS

July 15, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this

Offshore drilling won’t change the price of oil in the world, but what can it hurt? Exxon and Chevron will happily foot the bill to do it. And we produce a little more oil domestically.

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

JS @ 9.18, that’s an innocent-sounding question, but what can hurt are fragile ecosystems and (if this is what you really care about) it can hurt your wallet when you have to help pay to clean up after a spill.

If it were such a no-brainer to drill in these areas, there wouldn’t have been bans in place already, put there with largely bipartisan support.

By troutscout

July 15, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this

This is nothing but a 9th inning land grab attempt by the oil companies to get access to the only sliver of land on the North Slope of Alaska that they don’t already have access to, while the foxes are still guarding the henhouse. Big Oil has dozens of leases in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico that they have not tapped. Why can’t they drill there? Follow the money folks.

I second the hillbilly ragger. Start showing some progress in fuel and transportation alternatives, SHOW us that you have exhausted your resources in the areas you are already allowed to drill, and then maybe you get to drill in the wildlife refuge.

By Mrs. Godzilla

July 15, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this

We won’t see any benefit from off shore or Anwar drilling for ten years or so.

If we have not reduced our dependency on foriegn oil signifigantly in that time we derserve what we get!

Check this out

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this

I’ve wondered too why Big Oil companies do not use their leases to drill - could it be - just possibly that the cost benefit ratio isn’t favorable?

I’ve often wondered as well, why the bans weren’t lifted when the GOP had complete control of House, Senate, and WH. Could it be, just possibly, that the oil companies didn’t really push to have them lifted?

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

Good morning Mrs. G!

How’s it going?

Can someone please tell me who is T. Boone Pickens? I’ve seen the commercials, but I don’t have a clue about him.

Thanks.

By Lee

July 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

I’m shocked that everyone is upset about the high price of oil. This benefits the administration’s base of support. The elite win, as was desired from the very begining of the Bush presidency. Bush and his oil friends win. Cheney and his oil friends win. Oil companies win. Petroleum engineering companies win. Everyone important wins. Only common folk whine. The real winners voted for Bush, and encouraged a lot of other people to vote, too. So if you voted Republican in the last election, then don’t whine. You got exactly what you voted for. Big oil won. Big oil wins. If you voted for the oil cartel disguised as a Republican ticket, then you win, too. Now, go forth and enjoy your winnings. You’ve paid your dues, now it’s time to pay your dues again. And pay, and pay again. After all, supporting the nation’s elite has never been cheap.

By JeepersCreepers

July 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

Jay have you really thought this through or has the party line told you what to print? Dont you guys have a paper going out every morning telling you what the subject of the day is and the stance you are taking. I bet this is true! If it is everything you write is someone else’s ideas and ideology. You are just a puppet! That is so shameful. Disguising the DNC platforms as your thoughts and ideas. You are simply proselytizing for the Anit-Christ Obama and the do nothing congress led by the do nothing Pelosi/Reed. Lets talk about her/him. What has she/he done for America? Please enlighten me!

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

Thanks for all the positive feedback, rational folks.

Thanks, Jay, for bringing this topic into sharp focus.

Gotta go put food on my family. Back later.

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this

Jay, jeepcreeps is duhng, trying to rehash some of my teases to him and his aliases about hacking rushannity.

He’s a hack, hacking about hacking. Isn’t that like a way to enter the space-time moronium?

By GMAN

July 15, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

Excellent commentary Jay! The fact that, “any oil pumped from U.S. coastal areas would be sold on the world oil market, at world market prices.” is the hugh hole in the Republican offshore drilling argument boat. But they will never admit it.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

July 15, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this

While bike paths and sidewalks for new construction might be feasible in some places it isn’t in others. For example, Highway 400 at Hwy 136 the state built handicapped crosswalks complete with walk/don’t walk signs and everything. Not only have I never seen a handicapped person there I’ve never even seen a pedestrian anywhere near there. (This over a period of several years). It’s a waste of money. In my view we need to realize there is no one size fits all solution. If we are gonna drill why not mandate that all oil from the U.S. stays in the U.S.? You have to remember that multi-national corporations aren’t interested in what is good for the U.S. they are interested in what is good for themselves. Me, I’m interested in what’s good for the U.S. (This doesn’t imply that those of you who have another viewpoint aren’t interested in what’s good for the U.S., it just means we disagree).

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

We’ve already debated the fact that any oil pumped from U.S. coastal areas would be sold on the world oil market, at world market prices. If oil is selling at $200 a barrel, that’s what U.S. consumers would pay for it. We’d get no price break, no hometown discount. Changing that system would be enormously difficult, because in effect it would require the United States to nationalize its oil industry.

If the third largest oil producer in the world upped it’s production so that world supply exceeded world demand, then the price for oil would not fall?

Really?

It would be the first time in recorded history that ever happened.

But, most of all, how will we know if we haven’t even tried?

It’s pretty simple to understand, world demand for oil is 86 billion barrels a day but the world supply is roughly at 85 billion barrels a day.

The OPEC producers currently have the luxury of lowering their production, and with it world supply, so that oil prices increase, with the added bonus of not exhausting their supplies so quickly.

And they can do this because there is no other oil producer out there with the capacity and the will to lower prices on behalf of consumers.

Except the United States, of course, which is currently being strangled to death by it’s domestic dimwits.

Put another way, every day we Americans consume as much oil as is pumped from the United States, Iran, Iraq, Venezuela and Canada combined.

Nothing angers a socialist more than the very thought of the United States being an economic superpower.

The most pampered people in the world, living a life thousands of times more convenient than their recent ancestors did, you would think that they would be thankful that they do not have to saw down entire forests to provide themselves heat or to chase wild animals through the woods to put food in their stomachs.

Where do they think their refrigerators came from, the Cold Food Fairy?

It’s a choice that most well adjusted adults have no problem making; do we continue to better our lives and be a strong, well protected country or do we return ourselves to the days of grinding poverty?

And who is stupid enough to allow the socialists to make that decision for us?

Got bread crumbs?

By Willie

July 15, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Lee: You really hate the rich and the ability to become rich? I have voted republican since Jimmy Carter….and you my friend do not read outside the liberal media. I was too caught up in that at one time. Now I read both sides. Guess who the whiners are Lee…the liberals!! Rush states they get their motivation and intelligence from “drive by media”. However, I am dissapointed that our leaders can not make oil available for its citizens. I do not care about Eurpope or Africa or any other place until America has been attended to first. Call me prejudice but I believe all Americans come first. But you liberal communist must be kept in check for the future of our great country and its freedoms from big government.

By zeke

July 15, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Jay, you at worst do not understand economics, and, at worst are just a liberal moron! So what if we still have to pay the going rate? At least that money would stay in the USA and not go to support foreign governments and radicals like Hugo Chavez! Gas is not the only product from oil! Are we going to ban plastics, various chemicals used daily for agriculture, medicine and industrial purposes? Are we going back to natural rubber for all things including billions of tires? The bigger question, when are we going to repeal all the foolish taxes on our domestic corporations in order to keep their headquarters here and not move offshore, and, to keep all their profits here???? Coal! We reportedly have enough coal to supply our energy needs for up to 400 years! Nuclear power plant can supply up to 80% or 90% of out power needs in the next 10 to 20 years if you get conservative judges that will not bow down to liberal radical environental groups and allow us to safely move forward with hydro, nuclear and coal! The biggest bbom to our economy would, will come with the enactment of the “FAIR TAX” and the elimination of income, property, employment and other various money grabbing taxes of our government!!

Please forgive me if there is any mispelling or context errors, I WAS EDUCATED IN GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS!!!!!!!!!

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Willie if all the liberals got rich next year, as well as all the conservatives, then our GNP would be in the hundreds of trillions of dollars. The american dream, if measured in terms of making a million dollars a year, (not a lot of money by any standards, and hardly “rich”), is totally unattainable for the masses of americans.

The american dream makes one millionaire for every thousand slaves. Captitalism is Communism with middle men. Lobbied, or subsidized success in business is socialism, marxism, communism, and facsism. You would get rich on your own grandmother’s grave, you fair minded gentleman.

By Sparky

July 15, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

Bosch you have just done something that the average right wing idiot has not been able to do, see beyond the smokescreen of party lines and rhetoric.

Why are we so quick to jump on the “the Democrats have had the Congress for 2 years” (which it has not even been yet), but discount the fact that the Repubs had for the previous 6????

Exactly Bosch.. It was a SCAM then and a SCAM now. They’re all F.O.S.!!!!

By Greg

July 15, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Jay, please complete the following economics test; it is not open book; use a No. 2 pencil; you have 10 minutes.

1.)Given NO CHANGE in world oil demand, would a REDUCTION in world oil supply alter the price of a barrel of oil? If so, would the price of oil rise, decline, rise more slowly or decline more slowly? (Remember, you stated that an INCREASE in production from domestic sites like ANWR & offshore would NOT decrease the price of oil).

2.)Earlier this year, President Bush asked the Saudi government to increase their oil production. Given, no change in world oil demand, should this increased production lower the price of oil or, at least, slow oil price increases?

3.)When domestic oil companies look for oil in the U.S. does this generally increase U.S. employment levels in the oil & gas industry?

4.) If the U.S. does not import as much oil in the future (due to increased domestic production, lower demand or both), does this improve the U.S. current account balance? Is this favorable to the U.S?

5.) Should the U.S. develop an energy plan that promotes alternative, non-petroleum-based energy sources? YES (I answered that for you) and would this also lower the price of oil (ceteris paribus)? Will higher prices for oil hasten the transition to alternate fuels?

Please pass your test to a neighbor (like Jim Wooten) and have him grade it.

By GeorgiaValues

July 15, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Hey NRB.

So: “More government rules and regulations means less freedom and more expense for all involved.”

So I guess we want more lead in our toys from China, more tainted medicine, more tainted food in the food chain, more bank failures that tank and wreck our economy, more substandard built houses, more greed and corruption, and I could go on.

I suppose you thought tax cuts would lead to growth and prosperity. If so, what happened? We’re in an awful mess in this country and it’s directly related to Bush’s failed economic policies and failure to enforce the regulations on the books by using the same failed arguments you just did.

By GOPs got to go

July 15, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

Ragger if you keep putting food ON your family how are you ever going to win the Presidential Election I just nominated you for?

Kinky food habits might be a skeleton in your closet. I keep envisioning your poor wife and kids lying there just covered in daily fresh fruit and veggies.

By getalife "whiners"

July 15, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

The gop are using it to attack the dems because they got nothing else to run on.

Dow finally hit 10,000. It can stop dropping now but the banks are in trouble from housing defaults. How low will it go?

I think 8000.

To solve the energy crisis , Pickins has the plan. Yes, an oil man said we can’t drill out of this mess. But nothing will happen until the oil men are out of the WH.

So Chavez is right when he said oil may go to 300 a barrel. Anyhoo, stop whining and stop expecting a broken government to fix anything. That is crazy talk.

By Hillbilly Deluxe

July 15, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

There is alot wrong with the public schools, however without free education where would we be? Education is the great equalizer and it is the key to what made the U.S. what it is. In the past there were no public schools and schools were funded by groups of parents. Children were needed to help make a living and only went to school in winter or late summer after crops had been laid by. Like I said there are myriad problems with the public schools but without them most people wouldn’t have been able to enjoy the prosperity that they have.

By NRB

July 15, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

You have to understand that Jay is part of the Liberal Cult. They hate capitalism. They hate America. They feel extreme guilt that they live in the greatest country on earth.

Other countries are poor and downtrodden, and libs like Jay want to bring America down to third world level so that everything is “equal”.

The AJC itself is nothing but liberal propaganda, spreading hate against America and fomenting racism against whites in particular.

By GA_Tiger Fan

July 15, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Sure offshore drilling will not immediately help oil supply, but any find of a large supply could have an effect on speculators and they’re a big reason oil is priced so high right now!

Good call zeke!

By N-GA

July 15, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this

Willie (10:01),

You lost all of the real thinkers here when you cited Rush as one of your sources.

Zeke (10:07),

Usually people construct your first sentence using the “best” versus “worst” comparison. But to suggest that oil company profits “stay here” shows your utter lack of understanding of finance, stock ownership or dividends. You of all people should never call someone else a moron! Yet you manage to spew all of your uninformed talking points in a single post. Simply amazing!!!

Now you should pay more attention to the sign you are holding. Make sure that the side that says “stop” is facing the traffic at your end of the construction zone when your counterpart at the other end is letting his traffic through.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

G’morning, Bosch

T Boone Pickens runs an investment fund. He has a background in the petroleum industry. He’s famous to most people for accurately predicting - months out - the levels to which oil prices would rise.

His plan is to use wind and natural gas as “bridge” resources while we develop new technologies to replace a significant portion of oil imports within ten years.

I’ve said in the past we have, at most, two strategic interests in the Middle East. Oil is one. Remove that, or at least reduce it to a level at which its absence would not cripple our economy, and the entire landscape changes.

Obama and McCain continue to speak in generalities with little specifics. Calling for “alternate technologies” and pledging “N billion dollars” is not an executable strategy - it’s a goal, a vision, if you will - but not an executable strategy.

I will also lay out again a rejection of the argument ideas such as those reflected by Mr. Pickens should be rejected because they are more expensive than current options. First, include all the costs (for a starter, the US defense expenditures) and the equation changes. Second, I do not accept we should stay involved with oil despots because it’s cheaper funding domestic alternatives.

You can read about his proposal here:

Link: Pickens Plan

By Dusty

July 15, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

Well, I will admit first of all that I DON’T KNOW A THING ABOUT DRILLING FOR OIL.

That is what Bookman should have said to start with.

That is what most of you bloggers should have said to begin with.

I DO KNOW that I had rather not pay over four dollars a gallon for gasoline.

I DO KNOW that riding a bicycle 50 to 60 miles a day for transportation is not my “thing”.

I DO KNOW the government if supposed to be working FOR US, so write your congressman.

I DO KNOW that I should do all I can for conservation IN ALL THINGS including ‘oil’, transportation. money, housing, and personal and national responsibility.

Worry about your own foolishness instead of “fuelishness” and things will get better. And aove all, don’t be fallacious!

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

Subsidized Capitalism is Communism with middlemen.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

Georgia Values,

Your 10:12 made me think of something a little off topic, but since the oil industry and the economy are the topics, I have a question for the bloggers here - open to anyone to answer:

Most of us now have received our economic stimulus checks which we were rewarded in an effort to boost the economy.

I read yesterday where there were approximately 90 banks in trouble of crashing.

Anyone see a problem?

Now a well known AJC blogger told me last night that we are not in a recession, and technically he was right. By textbook definition we are not in a recession. Is there a word for the economic mess we are in because apparently “recession” doesn’t quite fit. I thought of one - a compound word - starts with “cluster” and ends with a word that rhymes with “buck.”

Is that word more appropriate?

By Fernando

July 15, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this

Jay, you conveniently forget some facts in your column to make it more compelling. First, it is true that Americans will pay for oil what it costs in the world market, but because there will be more supply, the price will be lower. And stop saying that the USA uses one-fourth of total world oil production with only one-twentieth of the world’s population. Fact: USA is responsible for almost 30% of the world’s GDP. So we are more energy-efficient than the rest of the world in producing each GDP point.

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this

Alaskans already pay the highest gasoline prices in the nation, even though millions of gallons of oil have been extracted from their own state already. There’s a lesson there for those smart enough to learn. Zeke, you are not among them as you obviously think nuclear reactors will sprout up overnight like mushrooms to ease us through the “next 10 to 20 years.” I hate to flummox you with a word like ludicrous, but that’s what your big idea is. Bosch, you’re a real Johnny-come-lately to history, aren’t you? Why wasn’t the osd ban lifted when the Republicans controlled everyting? Because 1) some of those Republicans didn’t fall for such a c**-a-mamie idea as opening ANWR and 2) George had to do what baby bro JEB wamted when he was governor of Florida (or his mama might have spanked him). The oil companies haven’t even looked for oil in much of the offshore areas they already have leases to. The push for opening more offshore areas is really about letting such pipsqueaks as Isakson and Chambliss look like tough guys by being so reckless with our national treasures.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

G’Morning Paul!

Glad to see you.

Thanks for the heads up on T. Boone - his name makes me hungry for some reason.

Did a little reading on T. Boone - I’m sorry I can’t write his name without laughing - he’s also the campaigner for the SwiftBoat guys. So, can we trust him? Maybe he’s not the guy who I’d invite over for a steak, and it’s hard for me to look past events like that, but if he’s got the cash to get some of these alternatives going, then life’s life.

Is he honest with his plans or just a smart oil guy who sees what’s coming and cashing in on the prospects?

I feel that Obama and McCain are using generalities now because they are still both RUNNING for President and not the President yet. Obama seems a little more vague because he is a new guy.

Imagine if either candidate said, “I WILL do this” - and then woops! Doesn’t happen. Hmmm…wonder what some would do with that. It becomes all their fault with failure.

By SaveOurRepublic

July 15, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Opening up more exploration/drilling isn’t the answer in itself. This is mostly just empty election year fluff being bantered about by the controlled Neocons (who are in bed with Big Oil).

The answer is multi-faceted…1) open new refineries across the U.S., 2) relax environazi-spawned fuel blend & associated restrictions, 3) drill offshore Pacific & Gulf, 4) open continental oil fields & 5) drill in ANWR & 6)continue pursuing alternative energy sources (asap). While the benefits of these steps would be slow coming and gradual, they would indeed help alleviate our dependency on OPEC.

However…due to the control of the Globalist Elite (who are in line with Big Oil), this will never happen. The Elite want to implement their One-World socialist dystopia, and this requires removing the U.S. from our “Superpower” status. This is being done via fiat currency, U.S. indebtedness (internationally), suppressed oil supply to/for the U.S. (lining the pockets of Big Oil), NAFTA/CAFTA (resulting in outsourcing of U.S. manufacturing base & insourcing of 3rd rate H-1B visa workers taking American jobs) & mostly the private Fed (arm of the International Banking Cartel) & their fractional reserve banking, fiat currency & manipulated interest rates.

It’s a brave new world indeed folks, and stooges like “Bacrock Obuma” & “Juan McAmnasty” are NOT the answer(s), but more pawns of the Globalist Elite!

http://www.jbs.org

By Fernando

July 15, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this

N-GA (10:23am): I am a proud owner of American oil companies’ shares, as many other millions of Americans and mutual funds (and maybe you if you are smart enough to have a 401K). Don’t criticize other people without facts because that is really a moron :-))

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this

Mike Hussein S,

I wouldn’t say that I’m a Johnny come lately to history, I just asked a question and provided an answer. I feel that if the oil companies had really wanted the bans lifted, and with the billions they pour into Washington they could have gotten them lifted. Hell, they could do it now if they really wanted to. Who could stop them?

Fernando,

I feel that simply looking at the GDP is not very reflective of whether or not our economy is in good shape or not.

GDP is what drives the definition of a recession, and to be honest, I think we are kind of beyond a recession.

Like in most cases, when analyzing something, you don’t look at one variable to determine success or failure, but weigh and measure each variable together as a cohesive whole.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

Mike Hussein S,

Correction, I meant to say in my earlier post I asked a question and YOU provided an answer.

Sorry.

By DaveD

July 15, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

Let me ask…. if we invested in SOLAR energy 10 years ago… (just as many mention if we had drilled in ANWAR)…which do you think would have had a bigger impact?

By N-GA

July 15, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this

Fernando (Zeke?) 11:07,

Go back and re-read my post, then try to comprehend it. Zeke said that the profits of new oil would stay here. I responded that he didn’t understand how things worked. Apparently neither do you. Stocks in these international companies are held by people all over the world, hence…

But then you couldn’t stop there. You just had to continue with: “…(and maybe you if you are smart enough to have a 401K). Don’t criticize other people without facts because that is really a moron :-))”. Talk about someone criticizing people without having all the facts! I’m smart (enough) by any measure, and have 401K funds, individually held stocks, mutual funds, precious metals, CD’s, etc. Those are the facts.

By M'Nose Pickins

July 15, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

T. Boone Pickins in my opinion is some guy who has shown up for the right wing to provide an economic platform that John McCain can morph his economic policy into. Mark my words people.

I heard this guy on Bill Bennett’s show about 2 weeks ago. Weeks ahead of that I remember BB stating that John McCain “has at his disposal some of the greatest minds on economic and energy policy”, and he wished he would pay more attention to them. Lo and behold weeks later, this T.Boone Pickens is trotted out and now we’re starting to see commercials. Watch what the Republican party does. The goal is..get the american public all riled up with the promise contained in these commercials….have everybody saying how much “sense this unknown guy is making”..then attach McCain to it; have him embrace it. Suddenly, McCain looks viable on economic policy.

If you can’t see this, you’re crazy.

By N-GA

July 15, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Paul,

Good to see your posts. I have a lunch appointment, but will try to visit later if you are still around.

By SaveOurRepublic

July 15, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

BTW, T.Boone Pickens is greenmailer tycoon who propagates the myth of Peak Oil. Big Oil commissioned & funded the “scientific research” supposedly backing the Peak Oil fraud (which helps line their pocket$). Boone stands to make (more) millions via his “Pickens Plan”, so it’s not out of the goodness of his heart. Pickens pretty much owns OSU athletics & supported Neocon/RINO scumbag Rudy “Ghooliani” (aka - Mr.9/11 Profiteer) for President.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this

M-Nose,

And he was the financial backer behind the Swiftboaters.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

And out of curiosity, I wonder how many people will get behind the “unknown” guy - Mr. Pickens - all the while dismissing the other “unknown” running for president.

Hmmmm.

By Reality

July 15, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

If current news suggests my oil will be worth more next month or next year or whenever all I have to do is not pump it out of the ground or basically nothing with no cost to me what so ever. If however current news suggests that my oil’s expected value is less it would be to my benefit to pump it and sell on the open market now rather than later. Conservation and producing our own oil would both help to reduce the expected value of the oil reserves held underground. This encourages owners to pump more oil which increases supply and lowers prices given constant demand.

On another note it’s really quite a lot simpler.

We need oil.

We can produce our own oil or we can send our children off to kill and be killed in foreign countries to steal their oil.

We’ve got a large empire to run so all you Liberals need to get off your duff and decide which way you want it.

There is no free lunch.

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

The markets almost made up their losses during Bush’s news conference on the economy this morning. But they dropped again when he quit talking and went back to work.

By Dusty

July 15, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

Hi fellow informed and always right righties. I am SO glad that I, make that WE, know all about everything in this bestest greatest nation in the world. Like I said yesterday, PhD, Sheem hD.

I DO KNOW I love yellow cake with thick icing

I DO KNOW how to fix pork in a variety of tasty recipes

I DO KNOW my rather substantial derrière would never fit on a bike seat.

I DO KNOW I love my Hummer.

Vote for the candidate that supports The Society for the Advancement of Fat Tolerance.

After all, I DO KNOW I need half your airplane seat to be comfortable.

By JAY BOOKMAN

July 15, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

Hey folks, this targeting of Dusty is beginning to take on the air of nasty schoolyard bullying, and it’s getting a bit too personal.

Back it off a notch, please..

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

I really don’t care what T. Boone’s athletic proclivicites might be, though I do realize such trivia is probably important to the same folks who laughed at Carter, who applauded Reagan for cutting back mpg standards and who think they can’t drive to the corner store unless they’re surrounded by 20 tons of metal.

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

H. Deluxe @ 9.58, that intersection up north, near where 400 becomes US 19, that you write of, may seem impossibly remote to pedestrians in 2008. I suspect it won’t be in 2018, at which point the expense and bother of retrofitting such places, which seems a “waste of money” now, will not be an issue.

It’s a lot pricer to retrofit a road for sidewalks and bike paths later than it is to just put ‘em in, like you should, in the first place. (which is why I’d want new construction to pay for the cost of retrofitting such paths where they’re needed, now. I don’t see how else we’ll ever get everyone linked.)

I realize I’m getting a little far afield, but from one rational hillbilly to another, I think it should be obvious that one of the reasons we’re so dependent upon oil is because we’ve built so many communities wherein it’s virtually impossible to get around without consuming fossil fuels. If my kid wants to visit a kid the next subdivision down, it’s virtually impossible to walk there even though the entrances to the subdivisions are less than a mile apart. That’s crazy. Those subdivisions should never have been allowed to be built in the first place without providing such access; it would’ve been a miniscule price to pay for a huge benefit.

I also know that there is a noisy minority of homeowners who like having things barracaded off, and inaccessible to the “riff-raff”. Those people, quite simply, need to get over themselves. And maybe some therapy. No, seriously, they need to see that it’s not “riff raff” on foot (and in buses, and riding commuter trains), but their neighbors and friends (and their kids.)

It’s either go that route, or maintain the status quo, and keep wondering why things suck so bad as they do.

GOPs got to go @ 10.14, I appreciate your late-entry Presidential nomination, although I’m largely pleased with the current, presumptive Democratic nominee and would not wish to siphon the dozens, perhaps even scores, of votes from Senator Obama that I’d surely attract were my name on the ballot. About the kinky-food business, I assume you’ve never heard the gaffe I’m paraphrasing. If not it’s high time you did I don’t really have to identify the author of this gem, do I?

As for T. Boone “Nose” Pickens, as others have implied, just because he seems to be right about one thing—specifically, our not being able to “drill our way out” of our problems in those commercials, he’s also welshed on a hastily made, ill conceived bet and I don’t trust the guy any farther than I can throw his lying carcass.

Dave D @ 11.14, that’s a fair question, although not exactly analogous. Had we focused, ten years ago, on fast-tracking solar cell R&D and providing very serious incentives (say) for home and business owners to supplement their dependence on the grid with rooftop solar panels, perhaps we’d see today commercially available cells providing ~30% efficiency rather than the ~20% efficiency the cells deliver today (the higher-efficiency ones are still in the lab as I write). I don’t know how much of a difference it’d make in average end-user electricity costs; probably not much.

If instead we’d started ramping up oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, we’d have a bit more oil on the market. I don’t know how much of a difference it’d make in average end-user fuel costs; probably not much.

First scenario costs out-of-pocket taxpayer dollars. Second one “only” costs whatever we figure an unmolested, publicly-owned habitat is worth.

First scenario, though, is a gift that goes on giving, because those folks who have acheived some individual “energy independence” have it for as long as the solar cells work. And they haven’t been pumping more CO2 and other nasties into the atmosphere, indirectly, by tapping into the grid so much. Second scenario… well, when the oil’s gone, it’s gone.

Just my back-of-the-mental-envelope scribblings, though.

Oh, and as for personally targeting Dusty: Like Jay said.

Be excellent to one another, rational people.

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

By JAY BOOKMAN July 15, 2008 11:58 AM Back it off a notch, please..

Kudos, Bookman.

By Midori

July 15, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

so we can look forward to you following that advice, Andy?

By Shawny

July 15, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Yeah, we would have oil, still at $200 per bbl. But guess what, we can import it at $200 or we can SELL it at $200 (translation, import less). All goes to the US GDP and improves the trade deficit picture. duh. That is the part the don’t drill now crowd doesn’t get.

So, in the short term, your alternatives are #1 - import more, or #2 - produce more. Choose.

For the long term, there are a gazillion things that can and probably should be done to cure the addiction.

By Riffing w/RiffRaff

July 15, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

That Picken’s commercial about the oil man who admits we cant drill our way out of this oil crisis keeps going and going.

He claims that nobody knows more about the oil business than he. I didn’t hear anyone challenge that assessment.

Conservatism is evolving into something alien to the Rove era. (guns, gays and gods.)

Did you know that Bush won the governorship of Texas by putting flyers on car windows in church parking lots on sunday mornings claiming that the incumbent woman governor (ann richards) was a lesbo? People coming out of church are going to believe everything they read, trust me. (That’s how bingo got so big).

It’s the epitomy of hypocrisy, in the shadow of the church. It’s evil, and if there was any doubt about what evil can bring to a country in the form of a devil like Bush…..and rove and cheney….

Now Rove had to flee. I predicted that the adminstration would have to flee. I predict cheney and bush will flee too, when the truth about Iraq comes out.

How many times am I going to be so spot on in predicting things? Did anyone hear that round table on This Week with Stephanopolous where one pundit explained how Iran’s leader has two audiences, and has to vogue tough for one, and negotiate quietly with another? I think I blogged that days before sunday. There was another point to that I made that was also totally spot on in predicting what the round table discussion would be, and they said exactly what I blogged. But I forgot what it was. But I am one true compass of framing the issues properly and exploring the solutions with wisdom. Exactly.

I’m just a source of issues resolution. I dont have all the answers, but I do know the questions. I’m the most timely, informative, and cool blogger on this or any other blog on the AJC. You know why? Cause i never sold out. I didn’t sell out. I look at all sides of any issue and keep an arms length away. that’s how I can be pro-life, pro-tax cuts, and anti-entitlements and still be a liberal on other issues, like letting people have guns in airports where all those widebodies jets are lined up a few feet away with all that jetfuel everywhere. Accidental discharges of firearms are rare, but why let them occur where any accident could be a total catastrophe? It makes no sense. It’s why conservatism is dead. They have no wiggle room. They can only charge straight ahead with dead ideas and obsolete motivations.

Hi mom!

By Midori

July 15, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

Shawny,

what should we do with all the oil we are to get out of Iraq?

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

If we had left Iraq according to the timetable of the anti-war movement, the situation would be the precise reverse: The Iraqi people would now be excruciatingly tyrannized by the gloating sadists of al-Qaida, who could further boast of having inflicted a battlefield defeat on the United States. I dare say the word of that would have spread to Afghanistan fast enough and, indeed, to other places where the enemy operates. Bear this in mind next time you hear any easy talk about “the hunt for the real enemy” or any loose babble that suggests that we can only confront our foes in one place at a time.

By Skeptic Tank

July 15, 2008 12:59 PM | Link to this

Anyone looking for answers to these issues from politicians in an election year is a bigger fool than the politicians doing the pandering.

By ron

July 15, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Hey!Jay!Dusty’s my heroess,I’ve never said a bad word.

One thing I know for sure.I spend less on gas at $4 per gallon than I did at $2 per gallon.Since I’m not going anywhere,I’m not spending any money either.I’m starting to get a serious pile of cash here in the house.That needs to put in a bank.Now to find one I can trust.

I just figured out that the tires on the Ranger will last for at least 6 more years.That’s good.

For the next two weeks I’m going north to assist in the installation of a geothermal heating system.I’ve always wanted to see one of those installed. I donate my labor,they pay the expenses.Sort of a working vacation.We’re also installing a point of use water heater with a solar preheater.This will be for summertime use .The geothermal will provide domestic water when it runs during the cold weather.The geothermal will be liquid to liquid with infloor hheating.

I wanted the guy to drill wells for the piping but he’s going trench burial.It’s cheaper for him,I guess.His heating bill last winter was $3000,according to one of his e-mails.Imagine what it would be this year.

Conservation is being forced on people slowly but surely.The high price of oil is going to be a society changer,and for the better.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

Bosch

I believe Pickens offered a mil to Sen Kerry to disprove any of the charges in the Swiftboat ads. Personally, I think the responsibility was on the ad-takers to prove they were correct, but that’s a dead horse (I hope).

Picken’s expertise is in the energy arena. His proposal is in the energy arena. So regardless of if he took a political stance with which one disagrees (much the same as if he’d said “I like sashimi” and you don’t) - still - his suggestion was in a different area.

And even if you don’t like the messenger, I give you credit for assessing the message.

Notice how this entire “debate” follows the old forms? Either/or (drilling vs alternate, not a combo), saying who’s at fault (Rep Congress, Dem Congress, or both, plus all Presidents, post-Carter) and no one here mentions the public. Just who was burning all that energy buying the large, heavy vehicles and going for the cheapest cost for the past few decades? Pogo - we have met the enemy and he is us.

Hey N-GA

Glad you’re here. I’ve perused the various blogs the past few days, saw you once, then out. I’ll be back this afternoon.

Didn’t see mention on an AJC Blog of Mr. Tony Snow’s passing. He was a decent, erudite man who seemed to love the debate and avoid the personal attacks. We are poorer for his absence, richer for his example.

By GodHatesTrash

July 15, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this

Did you guys hear the one about the walrus in a tanktop trying to ride a bicycle?

Oops, nevermind.

By truthman

July 15, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

ABC/DWIMismanagement:

Wrong…as usual!

I just returned from helping out at the USO at the airport!

You neo-conmen and women should volunteer down there sometime so you can actually see the youngsters your beloved Bushitler is sending off to the wrong war!! It’s a heart-warming - and humbling - experience to see so many young folks who put their life on the line for such a schmuck like Bushitter!!

Of course, Andi/Dusty/Zell/RW couldn’t drag themselves away from the (choose one: golf course, vibrator, rocking chair, Gwinnett county in general) to go actually DO anything for the service members fighting their war for oil. They’re such great Murcans!

By Midori

July 15, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Andy,

and what of the Iraqi’s timetable?

It is “thier” country, isn’t it?

Should we not abide by “their” wishes?

By Paul

July 15, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

AJC/DNC Management

So are you saying that on the issue of Sen Obama’s judgment in receiving credit for opposing the invasion of Iraq, that if you apply the same standard of judgment to his earlier pronouncements of what would have happened if he’d been President (wasn’t it all troops out by this past March, no surge, no change in counterinsurgency strategy, as the war was ‘lost’) - that given the situation that would likely now exist in Iraq, that possibly the ‘judgment in advance of events’ card is one he shouldn’t continue playing?

And I get the award for longest run-on sentence of the day -

By Let'm fall

July 15, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Here’s my plan.

Quit selling our grain to anyone but our allies or neighbors and convert it all to Ethanol. Require all new vehicles to run on Ethanol or gas and convert as many older vehicles as possible. Develope an additive to Ethanol that allows it to replace gasoline.

Stop all foreign aid. If you haven’t learned to support yourself by now you never will so let someone else take charge and let’s see if they can do better.

History shows that when a population starts to stave to death they tend to blame there government and change, often violent, takes place. The Middle East is no different and given the current situation major changes might not be all bad.

What’s the worst that could happen a few billion third world people starve to death or kill each other in revolutionary wars there by reducing global warming by them not being alive to consume?

You got the oil and we got the food.

Lets’ just see who lasts longer.

By Midori

July 15, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

ANALYSIS-US oil firms seek drilling access, but exports soar

what is your opinion of this, Shawny?

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

Paul,

You’re right - the public is always to blame - as people think politicians and greedy corporalists are actually there to help them! Isn’t THAT hysterical?!?

From what I read about the Pickens/Kerry affair, Pickens put out the offer to anyone, and then when Kerry accepted the offer, Pickens changed the rules of the game and made the terms of what constitutes disproving the claims or not. Seems like a pretty cheap thing to do, but that’s just what I read - who knows.

As far as Pickens making the proposal in the energy arena - isn’t the energy arena and the political arena sort of meshed together just a WEE little bit?

Gotta run - literally - going for a run - later!

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

Paul @ 1.03, I don’t think it’s fair to say this discussion has devolved to an either/or thing. I part company (and so, apparently, do Jay and Bosch) with some of my progressive brethren by stating that additional oil exploration would be ok so long as we were serious about changing our mindset about funding mass transit, making our communities more ped- and bike-friendly, etc.

Seriously, I think if you got a lot of Americans most anywhere in a room together and talked this out we’d come up with as good a plan as any the major candidates are offering. Problem really is getting everyone to pull in the same direction.

And not to point fingers, but guys like the aforementioned Voinovich (and, for that matter, our current President) aren’t helping much by claiming we gotta gotta gotta drill drill drill NOW NOW NOW!

By Hillbilly Deluxe

July 15, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

To Hillbilly Ragger @ 12:03

The intersection we speak of us is north of you but south of me. I hope you are wrong about what it will be like in 2018 but unfortunately you probably aren’t. I do agree with you that most highway projects are built too short term when they are built. For instance when HWY 400 was built the Dawson County State Representative tried to get them to build a bridge at the intersection of 400 and 53. Now they are spending a gazillion dollars to study how to do exactly that all these years later. Mr. Looper was quite far sighted it seems.

And finally thanks for the kind words in saying I’m rational. I extend the same courtesy to you. Hey if we agreed on everything there would be no need for one of us right?

By hillbilly ragger

July 15, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

ron @ 1.02, your trek North sounds fascinating.

Sooner than later, I imagine, those of us in more temperate climes will need to harness geothermal to heat our homes as well.

I’d really like to hear about what you’ve learned from this experience upon your return.

By Karl Rove

July 15, 2008 1:27 PM | Link to this

The lack of knowledge in this blog is amazing!

We only have to options! 1. Clean coal technology and renewable fuels 2. Flex feul cars with high mileage.

Zeke your lack of knowledge is amazing where are we going to get the water from to cool NUCLEAR REACTORS. It takes a lot of water to cool reactors.

We cannot drill in Colorado because we do not have the water to do so!

If you are counting on Capitism or our major corporations to get us out of this mess with-out government support and controls you are sadly mistaken

The GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN istrumental in making this country work much better then Enron, WorldComm and the GM’s of our world who cannot make good decisions even when you pay the loser CEO millions of dollars.

Quit being a loser, change is going to come to America regardless of new oil finds because we use a lot of energy!

Also please let me know why when we have had 7 REPLUBICAN PRESIDENTS out of the past 10 US PRESIDENTS why they hav not passed a bill to drill in other area;s/

Mr. Bush senior actually signed the ANWAR bill for no drilling.

Wake right wing losers!

By Sparky

July 15, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this

I’ll officially pose the question..to the right wingers on the blog.

WHY DID THE UNITED STATES NOT CHOOSE TO VOTE FOR DRILLING FOR OIL WHEN THE CONGRESS WAS CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBLICANS DURING THE FIRST SIX YEARS OF THE BUSH PRESIDENCY????

I will post this every 30 minutes until I get an answer.

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this

Dec. 22nd, 2005:

The Senate blocked a Republican effort Wednesday to allow drilling for oil in an Alaskan wildlife refuge, as senators defied threats of political and economic backlash to hand President Bush a major defeat on his highest energy priority.

The 56-44 vote was a more comfortable margin than ANWR drilling opponents expected. Two Republicans — Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island — voted with Cantwell to ensure the margin. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., a drilling supporter, switched his vote for tactical reasons after it became clear that Cantwell would prevail. Four Democrats voted on Stevens’ side: Daniel Inouye and Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Ben Nelson of Nebraska.

Duh.

By SaveOurRepublic

July 15, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Sparky @ 1:47 PM, the standard Neocon answer to your question would be that the GOP was hamstringed by the Demoncraps who’re beholden to the environazi movement (which is partially true).

However, digging slightly below the surface, we find that the GOP “leadership” (as is the DNC) is controlled by the Globalist Elite (who also control Big Oil). With this, it was mandated by the Internationalists to limit domestic oil options, propagate the Peak Oil fraud & bogus environmental “concerns” (see the “Green” scam) and other such hogwash. The Elite thereby accomplish two key goals by limiting oil options…first & foremost, they make the middle class more easily controlled (via higher gas costs/dependency) & secondly, they reward their friends in Big Oil (enabling their windfall profits). It’s all about control.

The “leadership” of the GOP & DNC are two sides of the same, exact, Globalist Elite controlled coin (save for patriots like Ron Paul)…and they follow the agenda mandated by their Ma$ters in the CFR, TLC, Bilderberg Group, etc. who truly call the shots).

By ron

July 15, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this

Hillbilly Ragger,I’ll probably leave this weekend and when I come back I’ll slip in what I learned someday.

By Old Time Rock 'n Roller

July 15, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

I was filling the gas tank in the car the other day - $55+. When the pump stopped, I thought about how someone I know was telling me about paying $70 for a ticket to see Keith Urban in concert. 70 DOLLARS! for Keith Urban??? Who”s he? Some country singer I guess. The point here is it costs more for entertainment than it does to fill the tank, so why all the carrying on about the price of gas? The Obamassiah is not concerned that the cost is relatively high, just that it rose so quickly. So, if the anointed one says it’s ok it must be.

By Justin

July 15, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Dear Atlanta, We also have a sports dilemna, its called Baseball, Yes, Americas favorite Pasttime is in trouble..Why, We dont have a Salary Cap here. Teams are on the brink of dying out, average fans cant buy tickets to enjoy a game. Lets do America a favor, go to MLBPA.com and tell them we want a Salary Cap in baseball NOW.

By Tom

July 15, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

John McCain: “I know how to win wars.”

Gotta love that one!!

By whatever

July 15, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this

Jay, you say the U.S. would pay the world market price for oil at say - $200/barrel. The point is to increase supply so the world oil market value decreases. So let me rewrite that sentence for you in a way that is just as manipulating as yours, just from another viewpoint:

“We’ve already debated the fact that any oil pumped from U.S. coastal areas would be sold on the world oil market, at world market prices. If oil is selling at $75 a barrel, that’s what U.S. consumers would pay for it. Isn’t that great!”

I added the last part in for dramatic effect.

I don’t think the desired outcome here is to rework the system but o change the balance of supply vs. demand - basic economics even you can understand.

By Karl Rove

July 15, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this

C’mon now the Bush Adminstration had not intentions of lifting the oil ban that his father signed in 1991.

So AJC stop speaking about a surge that is working because we are paying the SHia and the Sunni’s money to stand down.

Quit talking about a surge when their is no peace between the rivals Shia and Sunni!

Once we stop paying who is going to pay them to stop attacking American soldiers!

The Corrupt Iraqi Government I guess!

AJC you are so brainwashed!

By Paul

July 15, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger 1:17

I don’t disagree with much of what you wrote. My observation was based not just upon this blog, but others, reading columnists and listening to officials. My impression is many politicians are desperate to find a way to distinguish themselves from the opposition - so drilling here but not there is emphasized. Or drilling is emphasized and nothing else.

I think much of the drilling is psychological - similar, in fact, for calls to release from the Strategic Reserve - Spkr Pelosi’s call last week. Acknowledging it wouldn’t do much realistically for supply or prices, she still advocated it for the ‘signal’ it would send. Yet she won’t apply that reasoning to drilling.

Interesting - when it was pointed out to her the law provides for releasing from the Reserve only for supply disruptions, her answer was to the effect the Pres should do it anyway.

Then they could have hearings on why the Pres violated the law?

:-)

By JackLeg

July 15, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this

I love to read about all the boneheads who make every excuse in the book to not drill. “It will not bring down the price” Who cares, if we let American companies drill then most of the money will stay her. If we set up a program to under cut OPEC then we can really have some fun with the diaper heads. Drug cartels or OPEC cartels are all the same, we need to circumvent them, there is a reason they are both called cartels. If we don’t drill we can guarantee prices will go up at the whim of people who hate us, if we do drill and become energy independent and the price falls, then what would all you tree huggers cry about? Bottom line we can talk forever and have no control with regards to energy costs or we can drill and have the control ourselves. You decide, let OPEC run America or us!

By Sane Mind

July 15, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this

Can’t we all just get along… it’s just like the Iraq war… everyone wants it to end because people are dying, but that wasn’t the case when it started. stop putting the negative over the positive. Ultimately, drilling can help us…America… the land of the free become economically stronger… what’s the use in having the resources if we don’t use them.

By nerdboy

July 15, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this

Ok, so we can wring our hands, do nothing and stay tied to the oil thugs that hate us, or we can drill, require that all oil extracted goes to the US while moving forward with new technologies.

Doing something with limited benefit sure sounds better than status quo to me.

By Ryan

July 15, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

You can’t say we’ve won any war that we can’t afford to fight. I say we drill it into the president’s head that his self-serving War for Oil has basically caused the entire economy to teeter on the brink of insolvency. And then we start impeachment proceedings against President Shrub and Cheney too. And we sentence Shrub for war crimes. Who cares if that’s the only thing Congress accomplishes for the rest of the year? At least they will have done SOMETHING, which is more than you can say about this administration.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this

Sane Mind

I think the path should be to develop domestic resources to reduce reliance on Middle East oil while developing alternate technologies to replace oil-based technologies.

That’s the timetable for getting out of the Middle East.

But even Obama hasn’t gone that far.

By Scot Waldrop

July 15, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

The problem with these discussions is that they are no more than a venue to argue over the minutia. The reality of our national energy policy, is that there is no policy.

This is primarily due to strong opposing forces which butt heads continuously. Big oil wants more drilling, tax breaks, etc. Environmentalist oppose everything except wind and solar.

The reality of our current situation is that continued dependance on crude oil is going to be a persistant drain on the US economy.

We need a comprehensive plan. 1. Offshore/ANWR drilling. 2. Higher CAFE standards with less loopholes (SUVS). 3. Nuclear power 4. Wind/Solar power 5. Alternate fuel vehicles

The funny thing about the political parties is that they could come together on the issue, albeit for different reasons. Democrats should embrace the goal of reduced fossil fuel use for environmental reasons, and Republicans should be all for any policy which ultimately results in the amount of $$$ sent to the middle east and is used in part to foster US hatred and terrorism.

Now that gas is $4/gal, there is an economic motivation for pursuing. We can only hope that Congress can see past their partisan infights to do what’s best for the country.

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 3:33 PM | Link to this

See if you can guess if this is Bushie or Obambi:

Let me be clear: we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 - one year after Iraqi Security Forces will be prepared to stand up; two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, we’ll keep a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq: targeting any remnants of al Qaeda; protecting our service members and diplomats; and training and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, so long as the Iraqis make political progress.

I know Bushie said it first.

So now comes the part where Obama peers out from under his cloud of BS to see if the dimwit liberals bought this nonsense hook, line and sinker.

I opposed going to war in Iraq; Senator McCain was one of Washington’s biggest supporters for war. I warned that the invasion of a country posing no imminent threat would fan the flames of extremism, and distract us from the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban.

This guy lives in an alternate universe, wrapped up tight in his own little bubble, bouncing around in the atmosphere of planet moonbat.

1) Who was it that we fought and defeated in Iraq that was running around calling themselves “al Qaeda?”

2) Who hasn’t heard of the “two war” strategy that the United States has been preparing for for the last twenty years? And what moron really believes that the most powerful and technically advanced military in the world cannot take on two missions at once? Does Obambi think we are weak and stupid?

3) Is the fighting in Afghanistan not under the command of NATO and if so, why is dimwit Obama calling their performance a failure at the same time he says we should rely more on the “world?”

What dullard is writing his speeches for him?

By Old Time Rock 'n Roller

July 15, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this

GAS IS STILL A BARGAIN!

Back in the 70s, I had a low paying job - about $2.50/hr. Also, I attended a lot of rock concerts, that cost me on average about $3 a ticket. So, working for about an hour and a half would cover the cost of a ticket. Also, working for about an hour would buy about 4 to 5 gallons of gas. I guess that someone making about $8/hr today is making equivalent money. That person can buy about 2 gallons of gas with an hour’s pay, but it would probably take about 10 to 12 hours pay to buy an average concert ticket today. So while the price of gas is up, the cost of entertainment has gone up even more.

Why do so many people have their shorts all in a wad about gas, but nobody says anything about what entertainment costs? I wonder how many of you with wadded shorts paid to see 1 of the 4 sold-out Eagles shows recently? Did you pay to see Tom Petty, or Dave Mathews? I heard a dj on Z-93 say recently that Jack Johnson sold out Lakewood. (JJ sold out Lakewood??? We must be hard up for entertainment these days. This guy is a half baked talent at best).

I guess the thing is, we have to have gas, but entertainment is optional. Still, how can you pay outrageous prices for a concert or ball game, and still complain about the price of gas? As for me, the last concert I went to was Leo Kottke at Variety Playhouse, a couple of years ago, and the last Falcons game I went to was at Atl-Fulton County Stadium. The last Hawks game I went to, Mooke B. was the point guard, and someone had corporate tickets.

I’m not paying outrageous prices for entertainment, and you shouldn’t either. At least, if you do, don’t complain about the cost of necessities. Believe me, if we all went on strike, and refused to pay big bucks for tickets, all of them - ball players and musicians - would gladly play for our entertainment for less money. What they do for money beats working for a living.

By Bosch

July 15, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Be fair. McCain doesn’t have a comprehensive plan either.

By Goldie

July 15, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

Ryan @ 3:14 — should we impeach ‘em here in America, or just let the trials begin in The Hague in Feb. ‘09? So difficult to decide.

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

Any change in energy policy will be a huge uphill battle because of people like this: Cindy McCain to CNN: “In Arizona The Only Way To Get Around The State Is By Small Private Plane” Video available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/14/cindy-mccain-in-arizona-tn112695.html

Paul’s Honey do list is backwards. It will be easier to switch to wind/solar power and alternate fuel vehicles than to drill offshore and in ANWR and to build sufficient nuclear plants to make a difference. We’ve already got drivers in the metro area who are riding on waste oils from restaurants. And Pickens’s push for natural oil conversions also could be implemented sooner than more drilling and more nuke plants. I hate Pickens for what he did to John Kerry, but I am sincerely interested in hearing what he has to say about energy.

By Morningstar

July 15, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this

Great column Jay. No time today to pontificate and elaborate. It will surely be interesting to see how this one plays out.

It’s unbelievable that anyone would still think, with all the information out there, that we can “Drill our way out of it.”

By @@

July 15, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

Well Jay, the market is and has always been driven by emotion.

Oil Actually Falls

Sorry I couldn’t contribute.

Use all the alternatives available to us, but economies will be driven by oil for decades to come.

If we’re going with fuel-efficient vehicles, the bodies will need to be lightweight.

I’m thinking plastic?

I did see something on T.V. last night where they’re reviving Henry Ford’s pursuit of a auto body made of soy. Right now they’re using it to make skateboards.

Don’t forget your helmet, knee and elbow pads when you’re RIPPIN’ IT down the interstate.

By Longboarder

July 15, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this

Yeah, drilling would only add to our capacity, it sure wouldn’t solve our energy crisis. Better to sit on our hands and do nothing. There’s no point in simply improving our situation. If we can’t instantly create a one-size-fits-all solution, then it’s better to sit around and blame the people that are looking for solutions. Our energy policy really needs to fit on a bumper sticker so as not to confuse people.

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

to ajc/dnc management: You probably couldn’t work your way out of a wet paper bag.

1-Saddam did not tolerate or even chum with al Qaida. They weren’t there until after the US overthrew Saddam and the shia-sunni civil war began.

2-Your silly two-war theory won’t work unless the nation has sufficient troops and an endless supply of money to get the job done. That’s 2 strikes against it right there. The third strike is that it’s a stupid idea.

3-American soldies make up the bulk of foreign troops in Afghanistan, and more and more of them are dying. The Taliban is making a dangerous comeback and will open the doors for Bin Laden to set up shop again to flaunt U.S. interests and security. We could have had this wrapped up if somebody hadn’t balked 6 years ago.

4-It’s becoming clearer every day that the Bush administration is implementing Obama’s policies in Iraq, giving even more credence to his claim that the whole war was merely a distraction. And McCain is aping it too.

6-Only now do we have a secretary of defense who even remotely understands what is going on. Come January, we will have a president who knows this too. And his name won’t be McCain.

7-The big distraction in the war on terror has been Bush and his buddies’ craving for Iraqi oil.

By Sparky

July 15, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

It’s good to at least see some attempt at a response *Save.., because I haven’t seen anyone else out here bold enough to tackle it, which proves my point (and yours).

The Republicans are just as F.O.S. as they always claim the Democrats to be. That’s why this whole “leftist”, “liberal”, left-Right, Conservative-Democrat garbage is so stupid.

When people will start to employ some common sense to government we will begin to become better off. I have to admit though..Republicans are much more guilty of trying to pigeonhole people into a “liberal” box just because you don’t agree with even one of their silly little ideas.

By Taxpayer

July 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

What’d I miss, What’d I misssss. I had to get out and vote and take the family out for lunch and shopping and all that good stuff. So, how many folks have managed to refute Mr. Bookman’s claims with hard, cold, verifiable data — not that dime store rhetoric? My bet is zero.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

Mike Hussein S

Did you miss the part where she said her husband was running for the Senate? Have you traveled Arizona? Ms McCain was correct - if one needs to crisscross the state, across miles of barren countryside for one speaking engagement after another, a small private plane is a time-saving option.

Also, did AJC/DNC say we went into Iraq because al Qaeda was there? Or that after we invaded, it became a rallying point so we fought them there? And if we wouldn’t have invaded, where would they have gone? Afghanistan? So the only thing that changes is the scenery.

The two-war theory was, for years and years, the basis of US military planning. It was used to justify the budget. Not too long ago it was changed to a war and a half. Given our current situation, it would seem we aren’t getting very good value for half a billion a year (about half again more if other off- budget items are included).

Point 4 - some would say Obama’s sounding more and more like Bush, if not McCain! Just take a visit to MoveOn or DailyKos.

By Mike Hussein S

July 15, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

Longboarder, before we could extract oil from ANWR, it will be underwater from global warning and automotive vehicles as we now know them will no longer exist. We don’t have the luxury of waiting two decades for ANWR or the Florida coastal supplies to get into the mix. Gasoline is old school. It will be replaced.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 4:38 PM | Link to this

Bosch

Had a dropped post - I always want to be ‘fair”! So, yes, McCain hasn’t either, at least not since the Apr 07 speech @@ referenced, but he hasn’t developed the theme so he loses points.

Old Time Rock and Roller

Your $2.50 in the mid-70s would have to be over ten an hour for equivalent buying power today. Given the min wage in 1975 was two dollars ten, well, much hasn’t kept up. You did answer your own question: for most, gas is mandatory, entertainment takes many forms, all with varying levels of cost. While one can buy various brands of gas, it all costs just about the same! So much for the ‘free market.”

By Midori

July 15, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this

Hi Paul,

seems like old school week here.

So, AQ was in Iraq before we invaded? Heavens to Betsy!! Somebody lied to me!!!

here’s a good cause for your side of the political spectrum to donate

By SaveOurRepublic

July 15, 2008 4:49 PM | Link to this

Sparky @ 4:24 PM EDT, I’m glad to see you recognize the bogus “Left/Right” paradigm sold to the sheeple in order to create an allusion of a “choice”…when in fact both the “choices” are controlled by the same Globalist Elite ma$ters. Presenting the option of “throwing the rascals out” serves to pacify the masses, yet the replacement “rascal” implements the same core agenda! The quicker more Americans awaken to this deception, the quicker they can join the stand for our quickly fading Constitutional Republic!

http://www.jbs.org

By Brian

July 15, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

I usually read this for the comedy of a left wing nutcase. Time and time again I get a good laugh out of Bookmans liberal nonsense. That being said…..

He was dead right on this one. Oil is traded on a world market.

Regardless, just because he is right about this “Drill Here, Drill Now” nonsense, I still think he is a typical Atlanta Urinal Constipation liberal hack.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Hi right back, Midori!

And about a fourth of the public still believes it. Well, as I’ve said, about a fourth to a fifth of the public will believe just about anything.

BTW - you think a politician lied to you? Rule of Thumb: if their lips were moving….

Thanks for the link. Not sure what you mean by “my side of the political spectrum” as I said I think Tony Snow was a decent, erudite person. Didn’t say anything about some, or all, of his views - just how he conducted himself and the class he brought to political discourse.

But he was a public servant who gave up much in the way of monetary reward to serve - and the foundation sounds like a fine idea.

Hey Bosch -

Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles returns in September!

By @@

July 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Link to this

Hi’ya Paulo!

I always want to be ‘fair”! So, yes, McCain hasn’t either, at least not since the Apr 07 speech @@ referenced, but he hasn’t developed the theme so he loses points.

In case you haven’t heard, we’re in the midst of a presidential campaign and omissions are the newest thang. That, and changing positions on policy.

Just a little side note. Have you heard? The Saudis are making a deal with Russia - preconditions included.

They’re working out an agreement to buy arms from Russia provided Russia abandons Iran.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 5:19 PM | Link to this

@@

Midori’s correct - old home week! Now if RW’d just show up -

Those Russian’s are gonna depose us as the world’s number one arms dealer if we aren’t careful. I wonder if they’re going to sell the Saudis jammers for the Iranian air defense network (grin) - dirty capitalists!

I wonder of “abandon” means “no spare parts.” The implications are great. Remember what Khomeni was able to do with the F-14s we sold to the Shah? Yup - paper weights.

Seriously - Saudi’s are going to counter Iran in various ways. We need to not get shook up over this, seeing it terms of “Russian influence expanding” or in terms of alliances.

Again, back to one of my central points - if we didn’t need their oil, would we care? And we we want not to care, then we should….?

By @@

July 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Link to this

Paulo:

About the Saudis? Probably not, but Iraq’s a different ballgame. I’d like to think that we’ll finish what we started to the best of our abilities.

Obama needs to be very cautious with the Iraq issue. I think he’s misreading Maliki’s intentions on the withdrawal.

Regardless of what you read about the Assad/Olmert meeting, it’s all about face for Assad. That deal is all but wrapped up according to Stratfor.

Turkey is now seeking to act an intermediary between Washington and Tehran.

RW usually comes in late. Bookman’s is open 24/7.

He and Jay enjoy little chats.

By Skeptic Tank

July 15, 2008 5:37 PM | Link to this

I’m with the right-wing whackos on this one. Let’s start drilling, hell bent for leather. And then when one year passes and the next, and prices haven’t come down, and oil companies shrug their shoulders and say “it’s not OUR fault”, then we can all join together and point a finger at the right-wing whackos and laugh at them and call them ignorant and short-sighted and they can deny it and say it was the liberal media that was the problem all along.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this

@@

Oh, I think one way or another we’ll try to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Obama or McCain - things have a way of changing once they walk into the Oval Office as the President.

We never seem to give enough credence to another country’s politicians’ statements for domestic consumption. And we rarely get the concept of “face.”

24/7? Yikes!

By RW-(the original)

July 15, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this

Hello Paul,

Bookman tries to keep us moving, he’s got two posts above this one.

By GOPs got to go

July 15, 2008 5:59 PM | Link to this

Mike Hussain,

I do not know which surprises me more, that you actually read Managements diatribe or that you took the time to answer it. I recognize his signature cut and paste BS and keep moving down the blog.

I generally agree with Ragger here. About this blog and about the War and Peace sized blogs, just skip them. Those that continually have there agenda rants are just BORING as well as trite.

By Duh, it won't make a difference

July 15, 2008 6:16 PM | Link to this

Jay, you are an IDIOT! Go drill yourself!

By Paul

July 15, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this

Good to hear from you again, RW-(the original)

I see where the usual suspects (category, if not specific people) began a Dusty pile-on earlier and he told them to back off. That was nice to see.

Ever notice how when the argument isn’t refuted, the person’s assailed? Tony Snow, and the reaction he engendered, is a fine example of that.

By The Buckeyes

July 15, 2008 6:32 PM | Link to this

Read my lips! When we drill we cannot get it to the American gas pumps for 7 to 10 years!

Where is the water to cool Nuclear Reactors going to come from?

Their are only a few states who can actually build and work Nuclear plants and we would have to change the electric delivery grid in order for that power to flow from the Midwest and Northeast.

The south and west do not have the water resources to substain NUCLEAR POWER.

Our American car manufactures did not want to build cars and trucks that have high gas mileage.

If you want to drive you SUV you better work 2 jobs!

CONSERVE,CONSERVE,CONSERVE is going to be the new slogan.

Clean coal technology,flex feul cars,nuclear,wind and solar power!

By RW-(the original)

July 15, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Some of the leftist blogs have learned to just shut off the comment area before they post about the death of any conservative. Jay outed one of the multiple name folks and even made somebody sit in the corner the other day for getting out of line, so this blog looks the best of the options.

By the way, ml’s used to be open 24/7. It was a great blog at night and on the weekends with a few regulars and mostly pleasant conversation, but it became a zoo during the day. Their solution was to turn it off at night.

By AJC/DNC Management

July 15, 2008 6:45 PM | Link to this

Speaking of the AJC/DNC house coward’s blog, or I should say the smoldering ruins that are left of it, I wonder if Bonnie is at the new cartoon website frantically searching for the “post your comment” button?

Here’s to hoping she never finds it.

By RW-(the original)

July 15, 2008 6:52 PM | Link to this

OMG, as drunk as finchie always was I bet he is over at the cartoon looking for the post button.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 6:55 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original)

The solution was to turn it off? The wisecracks about management are legion -

I did observe the various blogs the past few days. Wooten had some “interesting” characters. This one seems to have more variety, more topics.

I’m surprised no one’s brought up the New Yorker cover of Sen and Mrs Obama. That topic’s on fire elsewhere.

By @@

July 15, 2008 6:55 PM | Link to this

Summary - Hezbollah has taken positions in Lebanon’s strategic Sannine Mountain area, sources have told Stratfor. The move likely signals that the militant group is growing increasingly desperate as it sees its options evaporating amid Syrian-Israeli peace talks.

Not strategic enough to avoid Israel’s jamming devices.

More cave dwellers.

By @@

July 15, 2008 7:14 PM | Link to this

Coalition forces in Afghanistan have started to build up in a border area, causing alarm among residents of Lowara Mandi village across the border in Pakistan’s North Waziristan region, Reuters reported July 15. Villagers said hundreds of troops had moved into the area starting late July 14, along with armored vehicles and heavy weapons, an unnamed intelligence official told Reuters. The buildup is taking place near Camp Tillman, a U.S. forward operating base in Afghanistan that has previously been attacked by mortars and rockets. A Pakistani military spokesman said the buildup is probably a routine movement and that media is raising unnecessary alarm.

That’s a rather odd response from Pakistan considering…..

By RW-(the original)

July 15, 2008 7:25 PM | Link to this

Paul,

It’s my impression, although I don’t know for sure, that Jay likes to stay close to the topic until it’s played out. I’m sure the New Yorker cover got some mention here, but for the life of me I couldn’t see why there was such a rush to condemn it rather than just chalk it up to freedom of the press. Good thing Obama isn’t really a Muslim or the New yorker office building would be firebombed by now. It’s also a good thing the artist put bin Laden over the fireplace instead of Muhammad. I thought it was pretty funny and the story inside was fairly balanced.

Wooten’s blog seems to work a lot slower than this one. Maybe it’s just because there are fewer comments, but they might also have less filters running over here.

By Paul

July 15, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

Well, time to finish out the first evening here. I don’t know if this is against the rules or not, so I’ll ask forgiveness rather than permission.

I’d read about Master at Arms Second Class Mike Monsoor, SEAL, Medal of Honor recipient. The email read “Master at Arms Second Class Mike Monsoor, a Navy SEAL, was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor posthumously for jumping on a grenade in Iraq , giving his life to save his fellow SEALs.

During Mike Monsoor’s funeral in San Diego , as his coffin was being moved from the hearse to the grave site at Ft. Rosecrans National Cemetery , SEALs were lined up on both sides of the pallbearers route forming a column of twos, with the coffin moving up the center. As Mike’s coffin passed, each SEAL, having removed his gold Trident from his uniform, slapped it down embedding the Trident in the wooden coffin. The slaps were audible from across the cemetery; by the time the coffin arrived grave side, it looked as though it had a gold inlay from all the Tridents pinned to it. This was a fitting send-off for a warrior hero.

This should be front-page news instead of the crap we see every day.

Since the media won’t make this news, I choose to make it news by forwarding it onto you guys. I am proud of our military and the men and women who serve in it. They represent the highest and finest values of this country. “

My brother just sent me a video of the memorial service. Seems a fitting way to close down for the day.

Link: Memorial Service for Master at Arms Second Class (SEAL) Monsoor

By Paul

July 15, 2008 7:31 PM | Link to this

RW-

Thanks for the heads-up. Posts did seem to be much more on the topic of the day than over at ML’s - which was more of a launching pad. I’ll keep that in mind.

Pleasant evening, all -

By RW-(the original)

July 15, 2008 7:50 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Thank you for that link.

The left is always complaining that they never have any footage of flag draped coffins so I suspect they’ll all be posting that video post haste. /sarc

By Hillbilly Deluxe

July 15, 2008 8:01 PM | Link to this

I’ve been around long enough to know that two things are always certain to happen. When the price of crude oil goes up, pump prices go up overnight. When crude prices come down (as they will somewhat when the speculative bubble bursts), we are always told that pump prices won’t come down for a while because “it has to work it’s way through the system”. I saw the Marshall Tucker Band, Jimmy Buffett, and Richie Furay at the Omni in 1975 for $5. Havana Daydreaming had just come out. Margaritaville was still in the future. Charlie Daniels sat in with MTB on the fiddle. Toy and Tommy were still alive. Toy was one of the most underrated guitar players of all times. And in those days that represented a little over an hour’s work for me. Good times.