Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Newsvine
RedditMuch has been made of the fact that a substantial portion of North Carolina and Indiana Democratic primary voters who cast ballots on Tuesday for Hillary Clinton told exit pollsters that – if Barack Obama is their party's nominee this fall – they may vote for Republican John McCain.
Should Obama be concerned? Of course. There is no question that the senator from Illinois must do more to appeal to wavering Democrats, especially white, working-class voters who have heard a lot more about the candidate's controversial former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., than they have about his position on trade policy.
But Obama's not the only likely party nominee who should be worried about some shakiness at the party base. Despite the fact that all-but-coronated Republican nominee John McCain was running essentially without opposition Tuesday, 27 percent of Republican primary participants in North Carolina cast their votes for a candidate other than McCain. In Indiana, 23 percent of Republican primary voters rejected the senator from Arizona.
Each state saw a portion of the Republican vote go to Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the libertarian, anti-war candidate who has maintained a semi-serious campaign while focusing on getting reelected to the House. But most of the anti-McCain votes went to Republicans who aren't even running anymore.
In North Carolina, almost 63,000 Republican primary voters – 12 percent of the total – marked their ballots for former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a Baptist preacher who is far more visceral than the likely nominee on social issues. Another 8 percent went for Paul, while 4 percent – one in every 25 North Carolinians who took GOP ballots – checked "no preference." In effect, they said that no one at all was better than John McCain.
Almost 20,000 Indiana Republican voters cast their ballots for the living embodiment of no one at all: former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Twice that number voted for Huckabee, who won 10 percent of the Indiana vote, while Paul took 8 percent.
In both primary states, Republicans in many counties registered even greater opposition to McCain than was suggested in the statewide totals. In North Carolina, for instance, 43 percent of the voters in rural Madison County rejected the presumptive nominee, while a third of the voters in the populous Mecklenburg County cast anti-McCain votes. Most of those votes went to Paul, whose genuinely maverick candidacy has attracted backers who are not at all certain to back McCain in November.
So, while Barack Obama should certainly be concerned about those exit-poll numbers that suggest not all Democrats are enthused about his candidacy, John McCain needs to be at least as worried by actual vote totals that suggest he has yet to "close the deal" with one out of every four Republicans.
Posting a comment requires registration. Click here to register
They're pissed.
Limbaugh ditto-heads hate McCain (endless Paul Shanklin parodies since 2000).
The global warming deniers hate him....he believes in it and that it's man-made.
Anti-campaign finance reform cons....ditto.
Anti-"amnesty for illegals"....ditto, ditto.
"Keep Gitmo opened and pile in the 'terrorists' or anybody they TELL us is a 'terrorist' types.....MEGA-ditto!
Sure he's "McSame" and "4 more years" on Iraq, tax cuts, judges....
but on those other issues, McCain might as well be Ted Kennedy to those guys!
Plus, you just know that despite hugging the Dispensationalist Dumpling (Hagee)...
McCain still feels that the Religious Right are a bunch of "agents of intolerance"...same as he did back in 2000.
Posted by Mask at 05/8/2008
flippy mac is the weakest pub nom i can remember...
not the stupidest - just the weakest...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/8/2008
While interesting, I'd like to see what that number is for Democrats and independents, too.
You also should be careful about making too much of it. If the decision has already been made, then it is fine to give the flip off vote. It will be another matter if it turns out to be a close election (wouldn't count on it).
Posted by srjenkins at 05/8/2008
I would suggest that another answser is far more likely.
Conservatives want to remind McCain that we are still watching and want him to know that we can withold support if he waivers from his promises.
Certainly you won't see conservatives flocking to Obama.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/8/2008
Obama the Winner is going humiliate Killer McCain, ON THE ISSUES.
Loser Clinton would have run on basically age, gender, age, age, and tried to out-warmonger him.
McCain you punk, Obama is going to take you where you dont want to go, to the issues: Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Bush, and Iraq - issues where McCain is WEAK, WEAK, WEAK.
Who cares about his age, beside the point. Bottom line: McCain wants a war with Iran and we CANT AFFORD to give Conservatives yet another chance and let their idiocy play out and once again learn a hard lesson the hard way.
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/8/2008
The Alex Cockburn piece in the new Nation issue is about right. When McCain finally gets exposed for his countless flip-flops --regardless of whether or not his kowtowing to the Ho Chi Minh regime while a POW is spilled-- he will be crispy crittered.
Endless replays of his "100 more years" in Iraq juxtaposed with violent explosions in Baghdad should seal the deal.
Those who like to gamble should go all in on a McCain drubbing in November.
As much as I am nonplussed by the current political landscape in America, I am looking forward to November for a thoroughly enjoyable pasting of McHapless.
Tee him up I say.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 05/8/2008
Obama:
The new Tiger Woods of politics.
Fore!!!
Posted by b_kool_66 at 05/8/2008
Loser Clintons whole plan was to run on Age, Gender, and at most Temper. McCain would have in turn run on re-hashed Whitewater scandals, the Bosnia Sniper tale, and by saying "your war-mongering sounds alot like trying to imitate mine".
Clinton would have been destroyed - better to be destroyed by Obama the Winner than by Killer McCain the JOKE.
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/8/2008
McCain:
The new Captain Quagmire of politics.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 05/8/2008
One in Four didn't vote for McCain.....the sky is falling!
One in Two didn't vote for HRC/BHO, the universe is blackholing!
I can't believe Nichols gets paid to post this kind of middle-school `analysis'!
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/8/2008
Happy, your analysis pro Iraq war and pro Bush. John Nichols analysis was actually correct on those particular MAJOR issues of the day.
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/8/2008
This isn't really bad analysis. 1/4 voted for someone who is no longer in the race. 1/2 of democrats voted for a candidate that is still in the race. There is a huge difference here. Voting 50% voting for a candidate who still has a possibility of winning a nomination and 20% voting for people who are no longer running. Kind of like the 40% of undecidedes Michigan.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
It's the campaign finance reforms that have Rush frothing at the mouth. Taking away lobbyists and corporate money from political campaigns is not in the GOP's best interest.
Posted by koroviev at 05/9/2008
Not only is McCain a weak candidate himself, hobbled by the GOP record of disasters, but McC may have his very own Nader in Ron Paul. Obama is in good form & getting better. Get used to it, bigots, your worst nightmare come true, a colored in the White House, not as doorman but as president, and a highly talented president at that, a stark contrast indeed to the last 8 years of GOP fiascos, deceit & corruption.
Posted by sloper at 05/9/2008
"all but coronated" in reference to Grandpa is nice. Suggests that he might get a crown or a coronary. ..
Posted by mikecope at 05/9/2008
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
It might do you well to remember that the last Democrat to win the WH having 6 out of 10 voters voting...for someone else...
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/9/2008
Congratulations to John Nichols! You point EXACTLY that issue: Not even REPUBLICANS like this APE face, who whould be better to QUIT this race and go ZOO!! There He can do HIS NUMBER` ... he can win a ....LOT of Monkey`s MONEYS...!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Your racist gibbering is an example of all that is wrong with America. Get thee to the "ignore" bin ...
Posted by leftofcenter at 05/9/2008
Get used to it, bigots, your worst nightmare come true, a colored in the White House
Posted by sloper at 05/9/2008
If you are going to pretend to believe that ridiculous caracture, I'm going to believe that Obama wants to recruit my children to be gay.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
The Black House!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
I keep telling you guy the first rule of politics is, "never believe your own bullshit."
Even if I can't spell "caricature" without my spell checker the idea that even 1% of republican voters are wrapping themselves in the Stars and Bars and saying, "Colored in the WH? Hell not!" is political bullshit and you know it.
The reason this is the first rule of politics is because in politics credibility is everything. If you really start believing McCain said, "I want 100 year of war" (rather than just using it as red meat to get the base fired up) (even if a lot of them are vegetarians), then McCain becomes the one to play the clip 100 times where he says:
"MCCAIN: Maybe 100. We have been in Japan for 60 years. We have been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That would be fine with me as long as Americans...
QUESTION: So that is your...
MCCAIN: As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. Then it's fine with me."
Then you look like a lying idiot.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
MCCAIN: As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. Then it's fine with me."--------Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
But, Darin, we STILL have to stay there UNTIL "Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed"....right?
So until we can stay, we have to stay.....right?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Dick Morris -- TheHill.com -- 8 May, 2008
'If Obama is elected this year, he will seek reelection in 2012 and Hillary would have to face taking on an incumbent in a primary in her own party if she wanted to run, a daunting task. But if McCain wins, the nomination in 2012 will be open. And it might be worth having. McCain will be 76 years old and the Republican Party will have been in power for 12 years. ... Hillary is attracting the votes of cops, firefighters, construction workers, union members. Are they in love with Hillary? They can't stand her. But they are terrified of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers and the various influences to which Obama seems to be subject. By playing on those fears, Hillary is undermining Obama's ability to get elected....'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 05/9/2008
How many soldiers are being killed per week in Japan? South Korea? That makes his statement 100% BS. As long as we have a significant military presence in Iraq, our troops will be in harms way for no apparent reason. If there is a small contingent protecting diplomats doing the job they're trained to do - and the army is not - then that is a different story. But that's not what McMaverick said.
Posted by Turk33 at 05/9/2008
Posted by HonestLiberal at 05/9/2008
Let me trying speaking in "Honestlib'ese"...
"A fine quotation is a diamond on the finger of a man of wit, and a pebble in the hand of a fool."----Joseph Roux, Meditations of a Parish Priest
Maybe he can only understand his own language?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Posted by Turk33 at 05/9/2008
What MBB/Darin leaps to is the "false" idea that "McCain said he'd fight a 100 year war in Iraq"....to which they say "No, no, no...he said maybe we'd stay 100 years as long as nobody was getting killed!"
Problem is...to reach the point where "nobody is getting killed"...we have to stay and keep getting guys killed.
Then when we "win"...we keep staying.
Unless we haven't won yet and troops are still getting killed....in which case we stay.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
MCCAIN: As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. Then it's fine with me."
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
Actually, by McMaverick's own logic, we should pull out immediately, because if he says we should stay there only as long as soldiers aren't getting hurt or killed, obviously we should not be there if they are getting hurt or killed. Which they are - almost daily.
Posted by Turk33 at 05/9/2008
If there is a small contingent protecting diplomats
Turk33
well, in the case of iraq
160,000 is a SMALL contingent to protect the diplomats!
Friday, May 9, 2008 9:36:29 AM
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
I hate quotation. Tell me what you know.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Blue Dogs block education money for veterans!!!!
The blue dogs excuse is something like they cant give the veterans any education money, because the Republicans who oppose it might one day try to take it away.
Blue Dog = Hate the Troops
Folks, America is on the brink, Conservative Republican Authoritarianism
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
McCain: 100 years in South Korea
What about Iraq????
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
Republicans: WRONG about South Korea
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
Adolf Bush, pre-emptive war, shock and awe, Air Force Uber Alles
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123087033
Air Force is Above All by Staff Sgt. J.G. Buzanowski Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
2/20/2008 - WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- The Air Force has a new advertising campaign to recruit the next generation of Airmen as well as better inform people about the Air Force mission:
"Above All."
"The new slogan is admittedly a bold one," said Col. Michael Caldwell, deputy director of Air Force public affairs, "but so are Airmen." This campaign accurately portrays Airmen and how they're executing the Air Force mission to ensure the security and safety of America now and in the future.
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
this is cute. they don't want to give the GIs better benefits, cause they then would not re enlist.
in udder woids, let's keep them poor and stupid, so that we have enough cannon fodder for any old war we might decide to start.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
CONSHAME, let me ask you a question...and I want you to spend some time thinking about it...
if Obama wins, and Dems hold Congress (maybe pick up seats)...and Bush is gone and Repubs are a minority party...
are you going to relax a bit, mabye stop grinding the enamel off your teeth?
Or keep going like you have been?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
anyone notice that Amerika's relations with other countries are now always described as THREATS.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
You are asking a rational question from an emotional, irrational nut case, and expecting a rational answer...
you expect too much....
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/9/2008
You are asking a rational question from an emotional, irrational nut case, me, and expecting a rational answer...
you expect too much....
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
I really don't understand why everyone is making a big deal about this. Just think for a moment who would actually go vote in the Republican Primary now. Ardent McCain supporters and people who want to make a statement by voting for another candidate. Why else would you even bother? I don't think this is a big deal at all. If you polled all Republicans, the amount of support for these failed candidates would be much smaler.
Posted by smmerino at 05/9/2008
Congratulations to John Nichols! You point EXACTLY that issue: Not even REPUBLICANS like this APE face, who whould be better to QUIT this race and go ZOO!! There He can do HIS NUMBER` ... he can win a ....LOT of Monkey`s MONEYS...!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
heheh
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
above all
or
under where?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
I hope that no one thinks that one in four Republicans will not vote for McCain. Most of those who voted for someone other than him in the primary will swallow hard and vote for him over a despised Democrat in November. What is really significant about these numbers is that they reveal a lack of enthusiasm amongst Republicans for their nominee. Without enthusiastic supporters, any campaign will have a very steep hill to climb. Contrast that to Obama, who has achieved god-like status amongst his supporters, many of whom will be willing to work, work, work and give, give, give on his behalf.
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
Congratulations to John Nichols! You point EXACTLY that issue: Not even REPUBLICANS like this APE face, who whould be better to QUIT this race and go ZOO!! There He can do HIS NUMBER` ... he can win a ....LOT of Monkey`s MONEYS...!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Something`s clear: America is OVER!!! Why you Mr. Republican WHITE Bush you need more troops in Irak?? Isn`t enough all those army forces...?? By the way, since you `re leaving in January 09, who`s going to pay the BILLS that You MAKE without consulting your NATION???!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
Well Rob, they did the same thing for McGovern and he still lost.
Posted by ACook at 05/9/2008
There He can do HIS NUMBER` ... he can win a ....LOT of Monkey`s MONEYS...!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
wow. at least hurricane minny is blowing in the RIGHT direction today...
lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=robgo2
it's not looking good for the repugs. they seem to have lost all the special elections, and are having trouble fielding candidates.
in contrast, the dems are having a boffo year at the polls. those record breaking multitudes will be back in November.
out with the republican rubbish.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
Dear ibbleblibble you ask me what country I came from?? What about you , are you from Ape`s Planet???!!! Yeaahh????!!! Disgusting!!!!...
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
minny...serious question - just curious - where are you from? are you still there? not asking for your life story, but just curious...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Its a joke CERTAINLY , I`m not intend to offend Nobody, maybe just Obama, his pastor & and the last One from this LIST , Mccain...!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Yeaahh????!!! Disgusting!!!!...
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
ok - that was kind of strange...but yeah...thats what i asked you...
and yes - i AM from "Ape's Planet" just like you. and yes, "ape's planet" can be disgusting.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
so do i get an answer or just insults (and minny - if all you wand is insults in return i CAN do that and do it well, dear...)
so do i get an answer or not?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Thank you very much but my Planet doesn` show up untill 2010. Have you heard about NIBIRU??..
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Actually IBB, I was thinking more along the lines of that possum who paid you a visit while back...'ol stink and hiss.. ;-)
Posted by ACook at 05/9/2008
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
IBB, I was referring to hurricane minny.. :-)
Posted by ACook at 05/9/2008
By the way something`s clear: America is OVER!!! Why you Mr. Republican WHITE Bush you need more troops in Irak?? Isn`t enough all those army forces...?? By the way, since you `re leaving in January 09, who`s going to pay the BILLS that You MAKE without consulting your NATION???!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Thks Acook better thinking of those ...BILLS?!!!...
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
So are you STILL interested to vote OBAMA???...
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Nibiru, in Sumerian, Babylonian astrology associated with the god Marduk, generally accepted as referring to the planet Jupiter. Nibiru, a hypothetical planetary object, as described in the works of Zecharia Sitchin et al. Nibiru: Age of Secrets, a computer adventure game released in 2005.
so MINNY - you are from jupiter...
ok...thats making some sense...
but i was guessing some balkan country based on the language...or perhaps tagalog...
not in the mood for games today minny - making an honest effort to be nice to you regardless of how nasty you choose to be to me, but beginning to think you see other's decency as a sign of weakness to be exploited and thats a sign of something very nasty against which i set myself and into which i from time to time wallow...
but how bout a straight answer...i'm from columbia, south carolina in the southeast of the united states. there - slap me in the face with that olive branch and i'll not be so nice...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
IBB, I was referring to hurricane minny.. :-)
Posted by ACook at 05/9/2008
hold on, ACOOK...think i might be making progress here. professional curiosity, you understand...
possums!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
so do i get an answer or not?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
all answers found here:
http://www.mihneafiran.ro/
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
columbia, home of the sunken ihop.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008 | i
ROMANIAN! i THOUGHT that was romanian yesterday! ha! i'm good (and bad)!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
"not in the mood for games today minny - making an honest effort to be nice to you regardless of how nasty you choose to be to me, but beginning to think you see other's decency as a sign of weakness to be exploited and thats a sign of something very nasty against which i set myself and into which i from time to time wallow."
LISTEN !!! YOU HAVE PUBLIC INSULTED ME SEVERALS TIMES , ON THIS FORUM, SO WHY SHOULD I GIVE YOU A GOOD ANSWER, by the way Nibiru is going to make a lot of disasters when will apear so WATCH OUT!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
columbia, home of the sunken ihop.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
and home of the university of south carolina gamecocks (or lamecocks as i too often refer to them)
or as a popular bumper sticker her says "nobody can lick our 'cocks!"
but in fact if "lick" is slang for "defeat" (or "beat"), many many do indead lick our 'cocks...lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Ce parere ai despre apocalipsa anuntata de venirea planetei Nibiru?
a) Nu cred in asemenea aiureli.
b) Cred ca e posibil sa fie adevarat.
c) Deja am inceput sa-mi fac provizii in camara.
http://www.mihneafiran.ro/
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
whoa!!!!a big box just appeared! BIG BOX!!!
MINNY
of course i insulted you. i insult many and love all. so what?
you think your commentary was not insulting to many? personally i am immune to insult, having no pride so to speak. but enough of my pride in my humility.
are you actually IN romania now? what a fascinating country. what is your problem with mr. obama, really? his ethnicity? i know you romanians have treated your gypsy population at least as horrifically as we have treated our african population. do you see american blacks as some form of gypsy? or is there some astrological or philisophical problem with obama?
see? i can be nice. so can you!
ah, the kindness of cruelty and the cruelty of kindness!
BIG BOX!!!! NICE!!!!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Let me trying speaking in "Honestlib'ese"...
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Now let me try it with respect to McCain's statement.
"Failure is not an option."
McCain is saying we're gonna do whatever it takes to stablilize Iraq because that's the only option we have. If we stay a 100 years past that, who cares?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
ooooooh,
new box!!!
<b>testing</b>
well, preview's not ready.
submi.....
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
[Obama's supports will] work, work, work and give, give, give on his behalf.
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
They are college students. What do they have to give? Some dirty bong water and deposits at the sperm bank?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
Well, never thought it could happen but....
apparently RESE has a challenger for "Nuttiest 'TN" Blogger".
I guess we Super Delegates get to decide which one wins!
heheh
By the way....Zecharia Sitchin? Is a nut too.
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
See? Stereotypes can be a lot of fun.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
actually, the new box kinda sucks in safari3
was better with stretchy teeny box.
lol.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
frosty zoom, p.i.
isn't that right, simon cowell?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
McCain is saying we're gonna do whatever it takes to stablilize Iraq because that's the only option we have. If we stay a 100 years past that, who cares?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
"do whatever it takes"....what does that REALLY mean, Darin?
"whatever it takes"?....or not.
See "whatever it takes" COULD include staying 100 years in the same meat-grinder situation, couple dozen GIs dying every month, and $12 Billion a month in deficit spending....couldn't it?
No...wait....remember it's "WHATEVER it takes"....or is there some "lite" version of that?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
isn't that right, simon cowell?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Is this a joke? Are you serious?
I mean, I don't want to be mean or anything...but that was simply awful. One of the worst posts I've ever seen.
Seriously, how did you think you did?
(heheh)
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
I just got back from lunch with my wife. I caught 5 minutes of Rush on the way back to work. The collectivist have a lot to be proud of today. The UN has suspended all relief shipments to Burma because the communist government is confiscating all of the aid and allowing the citizens to die.
Just keep repeating over and over, "But that's not REAL communism."
Are you sure?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
O.k. let`s make PEACE!!! Actually you iddlebb.. have a ...problem with ...romanians...gypsies...and....afroamericans! Me Not, but you mention there some stupid words as: licking y... d...?! I`m not a puritan but aren`t you SHAME to write such ...THINGS! best regards, Mihnea
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
No...wait....remember it's "WHATEVER it takes"....or is there some "lite" version of that?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
What's the alternative? Run with our tail between our legs and hope the Islamic fascists that take over kill us last?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
ok folks see you soon !!! By the way , maybe you vote for ..Hillary????!!!...couse she`s a lady, and We should be ...GENTELMANS!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
such ...THINGS! best regards, Mihnea
Posted by mihnea at 05/9/2008
its a local cultural/sports reference, dear - an idiomatic language thing.
the local university has a mascot for its sports teams. here in the USA, universities are often little more than minor league sports franchises with a money sucking, parasitical, degree mill attached...
the mascot for the university of south carolina is the "gamecock", ie a fighting rooster. the shortened form of "gamecock" or "cock" which also is a slang term for "penis". "lick" is slang for "defeat", so some silly locals made a play on words..."nobody can lick our cocks" is therefore short for "nobody can defeat our gamecocks", our university sports teams...
got that?
i have no problem at all with gypsies, blacks nor romanians as peoples. actually have had very amicable relations with the few romanians i have known. attractive people too.
but i know the history of your country and like the history of my country (or anyone's country) it has its dark corners as well...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
What's the alternative? Run with our tail between our legs and hope the Islamic fascists that take over kill us last?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 |
Then what is the FLAW in postulating that McCain would want us to stay in Iraq for 100 years....exactly the way we are NOW...that you so heartily objected to here:
"If you really start believing McCain said, "I want 100 year of war" (rather than just using it as red meat to get the base fired up) (even if a lot of them are vegetarians), then McCain becomes the one to play the clip 100 times where he says:
Then you look like a lying idiot."----Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
Seems YOU just agreed that it could be McCain "wanting 100 years of war"....didn't you?
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008 |
IBB, I'm appointing you the ship's First Contact Liasion Officer, overseeing all new alien contacts!
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
I prefer Simon Callow.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
xenodiplomacy is a tricky one, MASK...lol...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
athena, from the green dimension
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
What's the alternative? Run with our tail between our legs and hope the Islamic fascists that take over kill us last?
Posted by marybretbrad
there coming!
at the qwikimart!
in the taxicab!
there coming!
they will eat your children!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Since we've destroyed Iraq - at the very least removing a rather stable, if authoritarian, regime and replacing it with nothing - then yes, this country may well be bogged down in Iraq for a 1000 years (or was it a hundred), in any case, vast sums of money had better be coming from us to help rebuild the country. That's the problem with Americans, no stamina for difficult issues.
Posted by Euler at 05/9/2008
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
HEY! You can get like 20 bucks and a reluctant handshake for those deposits.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Please, no more use of the word fascist, it makes my stomach turn. I've ignored Nichols's post, it's too absurd to comment on (re: the above who questioned his salary for writing nonsense, I'm assuming he's a twnenty-year old intern).
Posted by Euler at 05/9/2008
Total membri: 19655
Acum sunt online:
36 membri
21 vizitatori
11131977 vizite
egad!!!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
This is the problem as someone recently pointed out. George Bush and McCain want to stay in Iraq until we achieve "victory". What is victory there? There is no nation to crush. You will never ever get rid of the presence of terrorists. We can't even catch one person we expect to exterminate an entire movement. What mean by stabilize is not what the Iraqi people want. We want a country run by people who will bend over and take it in the ass by America in order to please us. The Iraqis don't want that. The governments they want we don't like. There is no winning this. There is no victory. Beyond getting rid of Saddam there is nothing else we can do. We lost this war before we started it because there is no way to beat them because there is no THEM to beat. We are fighting ideas and ideas always win.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Kind of like the war on drugs. A comedian points out that we are losing a war on drugs to a bunch of potheads.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
its almost close enough to spanish for me to understand...but i got that...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
hey mihnea,
how about a personal horoscope?
i'm gemeni.
cu drag,
frosty
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Then what is the FLAW in postulating that McCain would want us to stay in Iraq for 100 years....exactly the way we are NOW...that you so heartily objected to here:
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
The flaw is to believe the caricature that he WANTS war. Nobody wants war despite what many of your self-rightous friends tell themselves about Republican Warmongers.
There isn't a single person in the world who WANTS a war. There are two "sides." One sides believes war can be avoided by appeasing fascists (containment fantasy) The other side knows that with some fascists war is inevitable. You can only pick now or later.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
I forgot there is one way to avoid war and that is to surrender and cede your liberty to those who take advantage of the fact that you are unwilling to defend it.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
The other side knows that with some fascists war is inevitable. You can only pick now or later.
Posted by marybretbrad
turn them into glass!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
marybretbrad
an even better way to avoid war is to stop sticking the greedy stick in everybody's eye.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
yeah, me too.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/9/2008
Why was getting rid of Hussein a good thing? Why was that an accomplishment? And for the final time, there were no terrorists in Iraq, until we created them.
Posted by Euler at 05/9/2008
query please, by "greedy stick" to you mean penis?
Posted by Euler at 05/9/2008
>>>There isn't a single person in the world who WANTS a war. There are two "sides." One sides believes war can be avoided by appeasing fascists (containment fantasy) The other side knows that with some fascists war is inevitable. You can only pick now or later.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008<<<
MBB,
You really are naive! If you saw the documentary Fahrenheit 911, there was a guy with a hidden camera who was attending a defense contractor convention who had some interesting footage of defense contractor executives CHEERING for war!
These are the same clowns that have controlled Dick Cheney his entire political career with their campaign cash and are a key part of the Military-Industrial-Complex that has diverted US foreign policy for decades. Their motive is PROFIT, and they could care less about people, political parties, or politics, as long as they serve their narrow business interests.
There are many Democrats to blame for not checking this corruption of our government, and Hillary Clinton with her record earmarks on their behalf is one of the chief violators of the public trust. But, on balance, Republicans are the ones who have received the most financial support from the defense lobby, so regardless how they feel inside about war, they have to promote war as official US public policy.
Posted by Metteyya at 05/9/2008
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/200
Hahaha you think people really don't WANT war? There are those out there who do. The ones who make profit off of it. Do you REALLY naively believe that no one in the world WANTS war. There are those who are being paid by military contractors who WANT war. How about illegal arms dealers who make huge profits off of war?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Posted by Metteyya at 05/9/2008
I did see F/911 and know the scene you are talking about. I remember a scene from a John Wayne movie where he's commanding a sub and he takes out an enemy sub and a young officer cheers. For a moment he gives a stern look as the young officer stop to reflect that, "There but for the grace of God go I." Then, Wayne smiles, and we remember that they (Germans, I think) are responsible for the murder of millions throughout Europe, so maybe a little cheering is in order.
War is a nasty business, that doesn't mean it's not necessary. I can forgive people for getting caught up in the thrill of winning.
And if there were no necessary wars, you'd have footage of these guys winning bids to build bridges, or nuclear reactors, or some other vital technology.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
marybretbrad wrote:
"I forgot there is one way to avoid war and that is to surrender and cede your liberty to those who take advantage of the fact that you are unwilling to defend it."
Because, you know, Saddam was about to invade our country and take over. There was no way we could have stopped him, becasue our military could never stand up to his legions of Iraqi ubermensch.
Kinda like Osama. There's just no way we can prevent him from destroying America unless we lash out at a country that has absolutely nothing to do with him. Otherwise he wins, don'cha know...
Sarcasm aside, I've always been puzzled by this weird cognitive dichotomy that the most vehement of right-wing posters seem to have: on the one hand, America is so bad-ass that no one can stand against our military (which, although obnoxious, is at least true), and on the other, we're so weak that a few thousand guys in caves and slums can destroy us.
Sure 9/11 was bad, but if Osama and Co. were anything like a REAL threat, it would have been a hell of a lot worse. I remember watching the plane striking the second tower - real-time - on TV and thinking to myself "I hope to God they didn't stuff some suitcases with a bunch of chemical waepons."
(Small side note: while chemistry isn't my strong suit, my dad used to work for one of the Army's biowarfare research units back in the '80s, so I know that there are some really, really, really nasty things out there, biologically speaking, and I can only assume that our military and others have equally well-developed chemical weapons. In other circumstances I would have been worried about bioweapons, but fire tends to destroy them.)
There is literally NO chance that al Qaida can take over or destroy this country. None. Seriously. The most effective attack they've ever launched killed less than one-tenth the number of people who die in car wrecks in America each year. When do you suggest we start the War on Cars?
The paranoia that some of these right-wing posters succumb is so utterly stupid on the face of it, and so contradicotry to much of their other rhetoric, that it makes it kind of hard to take them at all seriously. If it weren't for the fact that ShrubCorp. seemed able snow so many people for so long with such blatantly transparent crap, I'd be tempted to think it was an exclusively right-wing type of idiocy. But I guess my dad was right:
"There's no country, race, creed, or class that has any kind of monopoly on stupid."
Posted by gaebolga at 05/9/2008
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
Odd, two posts, both laced with "World War-II" analogies.
Haven't you YET figured out that the occupation of Iraq is NOT "World War-II"....either in scope, management, deployment, PAYMENT, or strategy?
Atleast the bloodthirsty LVLIB wants to FIGHT it like World War-II, with "think Dresden" when he's thinking Teheran and "Patton's tanks" rolling into Damascus and points north, east, south, and west of the Tigris and Euphrates.
If this was World War-II and not "World War-II on the Cheap" as you neo-cons wanted it...we'd have DONE what we did in WW-2....i.e. draft, taxes, national mobilization, RATIONING, etc.
Instead, you wanted it nice, simple, easy, CHEAP, and with little political risk until AFTER Dubya was re-elected.
Now you've got McSame talking about how "we must win"...when he and Bush and Cheney (and you and others) didn't give a rat's ass about "winning"...until you started losing, both on the insurgency and on the political front as the mismanagement and incompetence needed a "Surge" to make it seem as if "It's going to be okay NOW that we've recognized what others were telling us a year or two ago!"
And if that fails...as the Surge is...(Sorry, last month's "good news" slowly fading away as attacks are up and sectarian violence increases and al-Maliki is still Diem with a bad beard)....
you say "NO, we MUST stay until 'victory'...there is NO alternative...and if takes 100 years, so be it!"
and still think that will work with the 70%+ of the country that gave up on that silliness a year ago.
Sure McCain "wants" war...he WANTS "victory" doesnt he? And given Bush is playing out the clock, McCain wants that victory on HIS WATCH past January 2009, doesn't he?
And if 100 years of war gets Maverick John his "victory"...then he WANTS it, doesn't he?
And that's why he need people to stop thinking about Iraq and to start scaring people about Obama being a "terrorist-loving Marxist black guy".
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
Obama gets in and I AM going to RELAX
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
Conservatives: WRONG about Iraq!!!!
Conservatives: WRONG about WW2!!!!
Conservatives: WRONG about South Korea!!!
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008
I'm always interested in and informed by your writing, Mr. Nichols. One thing, though:
"Coronated" isn't a word. The word would be "crowned." Coronation is the process of crowning, with crown as the root word.
I know I need to get a life.
;o)
Posted by bearofmcc at 05/9/2008
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=bearofmcc
you also need to wipe the egg of your face.
Merriam/Webster:
coronated One entry found.
coronate
Main Entry: cor·o·nate Pronunciation: \ˈkȯr-ə-ˌnāt, ˈkär-\ Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): cor·o·nat·ed; cor·o·nat·ing Etymology: Latin coronatus, past participle of coronare to crown, from corona Date: circa 1623
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
off...
Posted by emile duBois at 05/9/2008
"They are college students. What do they have to give? Some dirty bong water and deposits at the sperm bank?"
Perhaps you are unaware that Obama is raising money at an unprecedented pace, mainly from hundreds of thousands of small donors. And if you think that all or even most of the Obamamaniacs are college students, you would be wrong.
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
I just checked Obama's website, where they now claim 1,5000,000 individual donors so far, and this is just for the primary elections. Please disabuse yourself of the notion that he will have difficulty raising money to trounce McCain, who is already lagging in the money contest. I am all for public funding of elections, but as long as the current deeply flawed system exists, money does count.
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
Obama gets in and I AM going to RELAX
Posted by LibsWarnedU at 05/9/2008 |
I'll hold you TO that, Connie.
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
90 percent plus of blacks vote for Obama and anyone who doesn't agree with THEM is racist? LOL
Posted by pontificus at 05/9/2008
2.3 million.....
The number of articles KVH shoves upon us by her husband, Cohen, that generate no web letters or response of any kind..
Could be that all 2.3 million of his articles are never read by any one.
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/9/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Very impassioned Mask. Nice post.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Thanks, but it's a key point that so many miss. I've made it to LVLIB, but ol' "Blood n' Guts" Larry (trying to make up for VN) wouldn't care...maybe Darin would.
See, one of the main things the neo-cons needed was a "clean war"...or actually a CHEAP war. No taxes, no draft...either of which would have sunk them politically in 2004. Both of which would have proved they were serious about the "Global War on Terror" too.
But they didn't.
And blind neo-con pawns (aka our local 28% Club) started imitating the "This is just like World War-II" talking points from Limbaugh, Kristol, etc.....
NEVER putting 2 and 2 together to realize that UNLIKE World War-II....NO sacrifices were being asked and the reason was obvious...
it'd hurt Bush and the Republicans' political chances.....nothing more than that.
And they never figured out (or many didn't care) that either Bush and Co. were monumental idiots (strategically)....or using them for political gain...actually a much worse rationale than a "war for oil" if you want to be hard-cold pragmatic about it.
So everytime you hear one of those "Well, back in World War-II...." or "Oh, I guess you're the kind that thought we should have ignored Hitler"...
point out all the OTHER stuff about World War-II that we AREN'T or DIDN'T do and say..."Wait a minute, if this war is AS IMPORTANT as WW-2....why aren't you willing to PAY for it like we did that war....or have a draft like we did that war....or start rationing or ask for NATIONAL sacrifice?"
Their answer will be "Oh, we don't NEED to do that!"
No...of course not...because you either don't REALLY think it's that serious a "war"....or you're too scared of what the consequences would be to ask for sacrifice and then see the rationale for the war (like WMDs) evaporate....
and lose the 2004 Elections!
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/9/2008
MASK, it's you liberals who demanded an end to the draft, and now it's your oppositions fault that there is none? I'll add that to the list of absurdities that the left believes.
Posted by pontificus at 05/9/2008
Posted by robgo2 at 05/9/2008
Who says that Obam would have trouble raising money? The last I read, Obama had $42 million in the bank. The liberals have had no problem raising money.
But guess what? Their ideas still suck, and they'll lose because of it. They tried foisting a hard left candidate in 2004, and the country balked. They'll balk again. Take it to the bank, my friend.
Posted by pontificus at 05/9/2008
Vince Foster Chokes on Freedom Fries!
UnAmericans unite & undulate to their ol' fave, "We Hate Liberty"!
Limbaugh saves the institution of marriage!
Posted by winyahn at 05/9/2008
DEAR left-wing, far-left, progressive liberal communist wackos,
enemy aiding 'n abetting unAmerican unpatriotic socialists,
amoral lowlife pro-sodomite-homo, wimp, faggot, subhuman filth,
godless, flip-flopping, tax-loving, big-spending, terrorist-catering, Muslim-licking ineffectual hand-out seekin' parasites,
snobby, elite, windsurfing, pipe puffin', hobnobbin' highbrows,
drugged up, hysterical, bitchy moanin' groanin' welfare queenies,
haters of freedom, haters of heroes, haters of personal responsibility,
the godless deity of Burma will dance in delight at your demise
Posted by winyahn at 05/9/2008
you also need to wipe the egg of your face.
Merriam/Webster:
Posted by emile duBois
orthographic karma strikes again!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/9/2008
I guess we all know that according to Obama, he's been in '57 states in the last 15 months.' According to him, this only leaves out two states, Alaska and Hawaii, which his aides could not justify. Of course, last I heard, there were only 50 states, but maybe he's so 'progressive' he's already traveling forward to the 22nd century? Quite an impressive candidate you got there.
Posted by pontificus at 05/10/2008
Posted by pontificus at 05/10/2008
Quite an impressive ignorance you have there. You insult like a child. Insulting the man because he decided to call Puerto Rico and Guam and other places of the like states. Maybe you don't have any actual points to make so you kick and scream like a little kiddy to get some attention.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/10/2008
Posted by pontificus at 05/10/2008
Would that be like Senator McSenile confusing "Iraq" and "Iran" a couple weeks back?!?!?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
mihnea to frosty : I`m Gemini too.!
Posted by mihnea at 05/10/2008
Posted by mihnea at 05/10/2008 | ignore this person
me 2. evil twin, good twin...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/10/2008
"Nobody wants war despite what many of your self-rightous friends tell themselves about Republican Warmongers. "
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
.
Huh, the only "self-righteous" friends I have ARE Republican Warmongers.
And, speaking of self-righteous war mongers...I seem to recall one just a few days ago, posting right here on The Nation, about how he thought we should just kill all of the detainees at Gitmo. From his posts, I'm pretty sure he's Republican.
. "There are two "sides." One sides believes war can be avoided by appeasing fascists (containment fantasy) The other side knows that with some fascists war is inevitable. You can only pick now or later."
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
.
funny, the 2 sides look quite differnt to me. One side believes extremist Muslims are about to 'destroy our way of life' and take over the world (Islamo-facist fantasy) and the other side believes that attacking a country like Iraq, and eliminating the secular (although brutal) leadership that had kept the extremist Muslims in check...was DAMNED STUPID!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
"I forgot there is one way to avoid war and that is to surrender and cede your liberty to those who take advantage of the fact that you are unwilling to defend it."
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
.
"cede your liberty"??...as in ceding your right to privacy? as in ceding your right to talk to Aunt Mildred without the government listening in? As in ceding your right to a multi-cameral govenment with equal powers and cehcks and balances among the branches? As in ceding your right to habeus corpus? As in ceding your right to due process?
Isn't it funny how, when Bush and his buddies took those liberties away from you, you were completely unwilling to defend them! All they had to do was scare you really good first!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/10/2008
Maybe her meds finally kicked in?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
Isn't it funny how, when Bush and his buddies took those liberties away from you, you were completely unwilling to defend them! All they had to do was scare you really good first!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008 | ignore this person
good point. the ones screaming loudest about Liberty, are the first to surrender them without a squeak.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/10/2008
me 2. evil twin, good twin...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/10/2008
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
i think that mihnea's passion for sen. clinton arises from the fact that he "predicted" (and posted on his astrology website said prediction)
that she would be the next president.
he's just trying to save face.......
hey minhea, if i'm wrong, sorry dude.
just speculating.
2:56
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008
Aunt Mildred without the government listening in?
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
all right, lillian!
keep 'em coming.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008
Oh, Lord....we got a Romanian Criswell!
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
mask,
taurus or scorpio?
heheh
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008
We are fighting ideas and ideas always win.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/9/2008
Really? So did Stalin and Lenin's idea of communism win?
How about Fascism?
How about unionism? it's growing less each year.
How about the Beta tapes? How about HD-DVD vs Blue Ray?
How about the Edsel?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/10/2008
Isn't it funny how, when Bush and his buddies took those liberties away from you, you were completely unwilling to defend them! All they had to do was scare you really good first!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008 | ignore this person
good point. the ones screaming loudest about Liberty, are the first to surrender them without a squeak.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/10/2008 |
Typical Lillian nonsense, eagerly endorsed by JR.
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/10/2008
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/10/2008
Sorry, FROSTY....
Isiah 47:13-14
Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.
Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.
(heheh....one superstition to oppose another???)
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/10/2008
Is the "idea" of Communism dead, LL? If so, why do you and Pat Robertson panic over Hugo Chavez?
Is the "idea" of fascism dead?
How about the "idea" of a "Young Earth Creation"?....most of those adherants are gone, but is the idea dead yet?
How about "idea" of a world-wide Flood were MILLIONS of species all fit into an 800 foot long boat, manned by 4 guys and their wives?
How about the idea that a 2000 year old book is "perfect and inerrant" after several transcriptions and "Councils" and edits?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
How about the idea that a 2000 year old book is "perfect and inerrant" after several transcriptions and "Councils" and edits?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
AH....but more interesting, inciteful and honest than ALGORES fictional comic book with follow along cartoon movie.
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/10/2008
funny, the 2 sides look quite differnt to me. One side believes extremist Muslims are about to 'destroy our way of life' and take over the world (Islamo-facist fantasy)…
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
It's probably too late for anyone to read this, but nobody is worried about extremist Muslims "conquering" the world. (Buchanan talks about fertility rates of the Middle East versus the West, but that's not a military conquering.)
The smartest thing I've read about the war on terror is that the West isn't trying to "eliminate" Muslim extremists. Theirs is a dead-end suicide cult that will eventually die out on its own. What the West has to do is manage its extinction. A suicide cult can cause millions and millions of deaths during its death throes.
The idea behind Iraq was that as the most secular Muslim nation in the Middle East (‘cept maybe Turkey and Egypt) if we would eliminate Saddam and install a functioning democracy, it would eventually spread, just like democracy has done every other place in the world it has been tried.
So, fight them now or fight them later, now seemed like a good idea at the time.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/10/2008
"but nobody is worried about extremist Muslims "conquering" the world."-----Posted by marybretbrad at 05/10/2008
"...and hope the Islamic fascists that take over kill us last?"----Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 |
?!?!??!?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/10/2008
Thousands of accredited scientists and decades of data (plus EVERYBODY running for President this year, so drop the Gore stuff....McCain is a "believer" too!)...
versus a 2000 year old book of tribal creation/hero myth and a dozen or so religious zealots "account" of their leader's "miracles".
Yeah...sorry...going with the GW, not the JC.
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
How about Fascism?
How about unionism? it's growing less each year.
How about the Beta tapes? How about HD-DVD vs Blue Ray?
How about the Edsel?
Posted by lvliberty1 at 05/10/2008 | ignore this person
Typical post from 'Lying Larry'.
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
Here's one just for the Rev. Lying Larry...
Act 2:42 - 47
2:42And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.
2:43And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
2:44And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
2:45and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need.
At least some of those 'communist' ideas didn't die...
...they live on...
...in the Word of the Lord!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
It might do you well to remember that the last Democrat to win the WH having 6 out of 10 voters voting...for someone else...
Posted by JOMAMMA at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
Why would it do us well to remember that NOW? I mean, Really?
That's REALLY funny!!!!.....
....coming from someone who's never quite been able to admit that in the past 2 elections...
...5 of 10 votes cast were FOR Democrats!
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
The UN has suspended all relief shipments to Burma because the communist government is confiscating all of the aid and allowing the citizens to die.
Just keep repeating over and over, "But that's not REAL communism."
Are you sure?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 | ignore this person
Burma has a communist government?!?!?
I agree completely that the government of Myanmar is sick, twisted, ugly...etc. but, Darren, do you even have a basic understanding of the differnce between a military junta and a communist government?
Or are you just trying to make things up as you go along?
Seriously...are YOU sure?
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
the Burmese junta has ruled there since '62. if they were commies do you imagine they would not have been sucked into the Indochina war?
Posted by emile duBois at 05/10/2008
nuclear reactors, or some other vital technology.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008
Nuclear reactors are a vital technology?! Are you aware that nuclear power plants release heated water back into streams, lakes etc. and elevate the temperature of these bodies of water.
Over time, the elevated water temp. starts changing the marine life living in the "cooling resevoirs" and kill off marine life or alter it. You may think, ah, no big deal, but when fish start dying and the marine life starts moving away or again dying, that effects our eco system.
I'm not a greener mind you, but everything is a trade off. You may get power from these plants, but you are killing food sources and vegetation in exchange along with other damage we may not even know about yet.
In short, I wouldn't be calling building nuclear power plants vital.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/11/2008
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/11/2008 |
"Over time, the elevated water temp. starts changing the marine life living in the "cooling resevoirs" and kill off marine life or alter it. You may think, ah, no big deal, but when fish start dying and the marine life starts moving away or again dying, that effects our eco system."
You're just arm-waving my friend. What proof do you have that any of this heat release makes a dime's worth of difference in the real world? You're proposing that the very real benefits of nuclear energy, i.e., electricity, a material benefit that people use every day, should be attenuated by some made-up boogeyman that some environut has sold you. It's asinine logic like this, e.g., non-sensical environmental nonsense like the kind that you've been brainwashed with, that has helped to drive the price of oil sky-high by eliminating expansion of domestic oil production in Alaska and off-shore in the lower 48. The next time you look for someone to blame for high oil prices, look in the mirror.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
""cede your liberty"??...as in ceding your right to privacy? as in ceding your right to talk to Aunt Mildred without the government listening in? As in ceding your right to a multi-cameral govenment with equal powers and cehcks and balances among the branches? As in ceding your right to habeus corpus? As in ceding your right to due process?"
The only people I know of who have been deprived of these things are terrorists. Do you know of anyone else who has?
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
Posted by Lillian at 05/10/2008
What is this seeming sympathy that many of you on the left have for terrorists? You folks keep crying about the lack of due process for terrorists, but the last time I checked, most of them have been caught under arms on the battlefield and most of them weren't American citiizens to begin with. Some of the lefties here even have said they believe that ALL terrorists in Gitmo are categorically innocent, as if there's not a guilty terrorist in the world.
Is it the fact that so many of you lefties find common ground when it comes to hatred of America? It seems so.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
The idea behind Iraq was that as the most secular Muslim nation in the Middle East (‘cept maybe Turkey and Egypt) if we would eliminate Saddam and install a functioning democracy, it would eventually spread, just like democracy has done every other place in the world it has been tried.
So, fight them now or fight them later, now seemed like a good idea at the time.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/10/2008 | ignore this person
Wow.
Just the other day Darren, you were talking about UNSCR 1441, which was all about allowing weapons inspectors have free reign in Iraq to look for WMDs, being the basis of legality for the US invasion.
Now you're talking about this new 'idea' behind the US invasion of Iraq being that we would go to Iraq and take out the one guy who MADE Iraq a secular Muslim nation, and who was the only thing KEEPING it a secular nation, and plant democracy there instead.
Gee, anyone who was dumb enough to think that "seemed like a good idea at the time" must be just completely baffled by the way things actually turned out, huh?
Of course, the rest of us who could have called that for the BONE-HEADED stupidity that it is, wouldn't be at all surprised at the outcome.
(BTW, You do realize this new 'idea' means that the whole 'enforcing UNSCR 1441' rationale was a complete LIE...but then, you actually knew that, right? And logically, there's no real way to fit the whole "fight them now or fight them later" thing into that lame-brain plan, now is there.)
Posted by Lillian at 05/11/2008
Maybe her meds finally kicked in?
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
or...xeno-diplomat extraordinaire bustin' out some mad skills...
har har...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/11/2008
Hy there? Mr.idd? I want personal to ask you something!
Posted by mihnea at 05/11/2008
As you mention 2 days before, Yes I`m from Romania, actually living in Bucharest, and yes I do have... problems with ...gypsies!!! My property HOUSE locating in Bucharest have been burgled by GYPSIES... hundred...of....TIMES!!! Name of those I aldready know: CIUNGU, BILA, COMISARUL,RAC, MOSNEAG,VINTILA FAMILY,AGANTINII. ETC..ETC...!!! I should call you MASTER or TEACHER, idd because, you ALDREDY KNOW AND ANTICIPATE MY ...."INSAINE" SITUATION!!! ROMANIA is a great country, but except balast...garbages...THE GYPSIES!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/11/2008
As you mention 2 days before, Yes I`m from Romania, actually living in Bucharest, and yes I do have... problems with ...gypsies!!! My property HOUSE locating in Bucharest have been burgled by GYPSIES... hundred...of....TIMES!!! Name of those I aldready know: CIUNGU, BILA, COMISARUL,RAC, MOSNEAG,VINTILA FAMILY,AGANTINII. ETC..ETC...!!! I should call you MASTER or TEACHER, idd because, you ALDREDY KNOW AND ANTICIPATE MY ...."INSAINE" SITUATION!!! ROMANIA is a great country, but except balast...garbages...THE GYPSIES!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/11/2008
"A suicide cult can cause millions and millions of deaths during its death throes."
Only those with significant nuclear armories can cause millions & millions of deaths ... Israel, which swears in all military recruits at Masada, home to its original suicide cult, has a nuclear armory of that size. So do the US, Russia, China, UK & France. Pakistan & India do not, yet.
Posted by sloper at 05/11/2008
As you mention 2 days before, Yes I`m from Romania, actually living in Bucharest, and yes I do have... problems with ...gypsies!!! My property HOUSE locating in Bucharest have been burgled by GYPSIES... hundred...of....TIMES!!! Name of those I aldready know: CIUNGU, BILA, COMISARUL,RAC, MOSNEAG,VINTILA FAMILY,AGANTINII. ETC..ETC...!!! I should call you MASTER or TEACHER, idd because, you ALDREDY KNOW AND ANTICIPATE MY ...."INSAINE" SITUATION!!! ROMANIA is a great country, but except balast...garbages...THE GYPSIES!!!
Posted by mihnea at 05/11/2008
lets see what the "librool media" is saying about McCain the conservative...
Media Matters:
"In her latest column, posted online on October 29 and that will appear in the November 6 edition of U.S. News & World Report, U.S. News contributing editor and CBS News national political correspondent Gloria Borger asserted that "[n]o one would accuse [Sen. John] McCain [R-AZ] of equivocating on anything." Writing about the prospect of Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) running for president in 2008, Borger contrasted him with McCain, asserting that Obama's "penchant for wishy-washy is well documented." Yet as Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, despite an abundance of well-documented backtracks, flip-flops, and inconsistencies, the media continue to describe McCain with words such as "honest" and "authentic" and generally regard him as an unwavering purveyor of "straight talk." Some examples of McCain's hedging include:
FLIP
FLOP
FLIP
FLOP
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as "an agent of intolerance" in 2002, but since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans "deserved" the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell's debate coach.)
* McCain used to oppose Bush's tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending "dirty money" to help finance Bush's presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.
* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.
* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won't back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.
* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he's pro-ethanol.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* And now he's both for and against overturning Roe v. Wade.
8:38am
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
John McCain, Straight Talker. January 10, 2008
"I don't believe we are headed into a recession. I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong."
John McCain, flip flopper, May 9, 2008
"I would say that…oh…it's very likely and more and more economists are saying that we are probably – quote – in a recession."
8:46 am
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
flippity floppity hippity hop.
The straight talk express hoppin it's way down the bunny trail, followed by a long line of frightened little sheep that still think Barak Obama is a Muslim.
it could be a fairy tale, if it were not so frickin absurd!
Hey sheep, maybe you should vote based on who you would rather have a beer with!! Now that's a criteria for President!!
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
CRABBIE, I find it fascinating and not a little curious how someone such as yourself, who claims to be some sort of financial planner, appears on so many occasions to be ignorant of so many things related to economics and the basic workings of the American economy. For example, a few weeks or months ago you were complaining bitterly about the rising costs of propane for your double-wide trailer, all at the same time as the cost of crude oil was hitting new highs. Do you see no connection between the two? Presumably, moreover, as an apparent prototypical knee-jerk liberal Democrat, you also are opposed to the exploitation of new sources of oil in the U.S. You also, apparently, see no connection between the closing off of new sources of supply, ever escalating demand, and the rising cost of crude oil. Like most economically ignorant liberals, I would also suspect that you have no idea why the profits of domestic oil companies must necessarily skyrocket when the price of crude skyrockets, partially as a result of your very own policies. All of this leads me to realize that the licensing requirements for financial planners are apparently insufficient, and perhaps some basic knowledge of economic principles should be demonstrated before such licensing should be considered.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
CRABBIE,.....claims to be some sort of financial planner, .....complaining bitterly about the rising costs of propane.....have no idea why the profits of domestic oil companies must necessarily skyrocket when the price of crude skyrockets, partially as a result of your very own policies.....
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
CRABBIE? Don't recall as a $$$ planner....but a welder of some sort, specializing in Chickenhawk pipe bombs!
I must say, the fantastic profits I have reaped--regularly and for quite some time--from my Energy holdings, are due in no small part, to head-in-sands `friends' like CRABBIE & Wolfgang1.
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/11/2008
who would you like smoke a joint with? McCain or Obama?
it is that which should guide your vote.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/11/2008
in a recession."
8:46 am
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
mccain's not to good with finance.
i bet cindy does the taxes......
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008
multi millionaires would hardly do their own taxes.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/11/2008
get the joke. read betwixt the lines.....
<i>McCain's wife won't release her tax returns
WASHINGTON -- Cindy McCain, the wife of Sen. John McCain, said in an interview televised Thursday that she would never release her tax returns, even if her husband was elected president and she became first lady.
Cindy McCain, who has a significant stake in a beer distributorship in Phoenix that her late father helped found, is wealthier than her husband and files her taxes separately. On NBC's "Today" show, McCain, who has cited privacy concerns for her children, said she had no intention of releasing her returns. "This is a privacy issue," she said.
"What is John McCain trying to hide?" asked Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee. "Throughout this campaign, he has acted like his own calls for openness and accountability apply to everyone but himself."</i>
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008
Posted by emile duBois at 05/11/2008
"who would you like smoke a joint with? McCain or Obama?
it is that which should guide your vote."
Based on the economic policies of candidates like Obama that represent you, I'd say most of you folks have been smoking too many joints already.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/11/2008
It's amazing the degree to which economic ignorance and wishful thinking drives the liberal agenda. If I didn't know better, I'd suspect it was Exxon that was financing all of those anti-drilling protestors. How much oil company stock do you think Pelosi and her cohorts owns?
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
get the joke. read betwixt the lines.....
Betwixt is an archaic or obsolescent preposition, except in the idiom and cliché betwixt and between, which means "neither the one thing nor the other," ...
Posted by emile duBois at 05/11/2008
"but nobody is worried about extremist Muslims "conquering" the world."-----Posted by marybretbrad at 05/10/2008
"...and hope the Islamic fascists that take over kill us last?"----Posted by marybretbrad at 05/9/2008 |
Posted by Mask at 05/10/2008
The part you cut off was "Surrender and hope". (Are you trying to be Maureen Dowd?) That wouldn't be a military conquest either, now would it?
This tiny sliver of Islamic fascists I'm talking about definitely believe they will conquer the world, yet I am convinced they are wrong. The question is, how many millions will be murdered before they realize it?
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/11/2008
o.k.
read betwaxt the lines.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008
The question is, how many millions will be murdered before they realize it?
Posted by marybretbrad.
by whom?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/11/2008
Darin, the contradiction is on the one hand your statement that you don't think they can take over the world....on the other, that they will "take over and kill us last" if we don't go after them.
Spell it out....we "surrender"....what do the Islamists do? (if not "take over the world")
Sweep across Europe, then take over the Royal Navy, and land jihadists on the shores of Jersey, the Carolinas, and Florida and start plowing inward from there?
Or something less....if so...what?
Posted by Mask at 05/11/2008
I do foam at the mouth when I see people starving to death so some asshole can make more money on the stock market on his investment in oil.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/10/20
How would putting a cap on the amount of money one can make in the stock market feed the hungry? There is a deeply held belief that the solution to every problem requires sacrifice. The bigger the problem the more valuable the sacrifice you need to fix it. That's why they'd sacrifice virgins for the volcano or harvest.
The point is, some sacrifices are completely pointless and do nothing to fix the problem. Rich people don't cause hunger. In Burma there are people starving despite rich people sending them hundreds of million of dollars worth of free food.
In our country of 300 million, I'd be shocked if there are more than 100 deaths each year due to starvation or malnutrition. And there are lots of programs to feed these people and their children, but for whatever reason (drug abuse, alcoholism) they don't take advantage of it.
Rich people don't cause hunger, but they make a mighty fine scapegoat for just about everything that pisses you off.
Posted by marybretbrad at 05/11/2008
Ohh, Pontificus, do you ever let facts stand in the way of your ideology? Never!!
I am not a financial planner, never claimed to be. I am an entrepreneur, the very base of capitalistic economies.
If you recall my "whining" about propane, you clearly forget the details, which follow; the propane companies were found GUILTY of violating Michigan's consumer Protection Laws. They were NOT following supply and demand. Now that the REPUBLICAN Attorney General has filed suit against Inergy, surprise surprise the price dropped $1/gal, to what it should be under supply/demand economics. I asked you a month ago to explain to me how breaking the law is supply/demand, and you never answered. Yet, here you are again claiming that somehow a company that violates law, and pre-established contracts with end users is just following market forces.
You are an idiot sheep. Whatever the energy industry says, you buy it hook, line and sinker (You do remind me of Jerry Lewis)
---
(All of this leads me to realize that the licensing requirements for financial planners are apparently insufficient, and perhaps some basic knowledge of economic principles should be demonstrated before such licensing should be considered.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008 )
---
all this leads me to believe that you don't know what the fuck you are writing about. But, like your 'knowledge" of wmd's in Iraq, the never-ending war and the rise in power of Iran, Hamas and AQ , I am not surprised at all at your ignorance.
Let us take a quick look at your "economic policies" shall we:
1: The US dollar in free fall
2: Deregulated financial markets causing the dollar to plummet as a direct result of the sub-prime fiasco.
3: US debt again reaches record heights, again causing a drop in the value of the US dollar.
4: An energy policy that isn't. Notice, as the price of gasoline and home heating rises, fewer dollars to go around for other goods, especially durable goods.
So PONTIFLOGIC, do regale me with some more of this "knowledge " you possess, maybe some more about how Plame wasn't covert when the CIA and your Justice Dept say she was. Or maybe some more about democratic witch hunts with no democrats. Or maybe how politics was not involved in the firings of Justice Dept lawyers.
Or, maybe you would like to tell us again about the "independent" retired military analysts that show up on "librool media" and feed you the propaganda direct from the Pentagon/RNC office. ?
Jeez you are a shoddy piece of Chinese Communist work.
Please, please don't go out without an adult with you.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Lets see, the cons are victims of propaganda, proven violations of US law in the case of the Education Dept, in cahoots with Armstrong.
The Pentagon goes for years supplying propaganda to media outlets, most likely in violation of US law.
Chimpy breaks the law wiretapping US citizens.
Chimpy makes up new laws as he goes along to kidnap foreign nationals, keeping many for years in Cuba without trial or access to any thing resembling a fair hearing.
Energy costs skyrocket since the oil companies took the WH by decree.
The war enters it's 6th year with no end in sight. Deaths in Iraq again jump.
But, we "librools" have it all wrong. We have it soooo wrong that there is not a single "conservative" on the presidential ballot and republicans are losing each election they participate in.
Yep, we sure don't know what we are talking about. It must be the fault of the "media" again.
Baaaa. baaaa.
BOO!
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
I ask again, when is democracy going to sweep through the Middle East?
when will it show a sprout in Kuwait, a country we liberated almost 20 years ago?
What kind of message will electing John "Golddigger/flip-flopper" McCain send vs electing an African American named Barak Hussein Obama?
Who do the "hoist em up by the bootstraps" crowd want to elect, another golden child with a silver foot in his mouth, or a self made man that started life without a father in the house?
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Geez, CRABBIE, you open your mouth and out comes torrent of hogwash. Gee, now it's 'possibly illegal' for the Defense Department to counter the incessant propaganda being spewed by liberal media outlets? You insist that 'Chimpy' broke the law? Why don't you call the police? Energy costs skyrocket, partially due to the policies you and your idiotic ilk push, and suddenly it's the Bush Administration's fault?
I knew your ignorance of economic issues is impressive, but when you temper it with a dose of paranoia, followed by a desired to prosecute those that don't agree with you, I find your overall worldview pretty thoroughly repulsive. And I find it hard to believe you are any kind of 'entrepeneur', except possibly one of those guys who pick up aluminum cans on the side of the road for recycling. Certainly, any real entrepreneur recognizes you immediately as a phony.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
And another thing, CRABBIE. If your local energy company 'broke the law' by charging you too much for propane, and your proof is that the company is being prosecuted for price gouging, what exactly is your complaint? The fact that people break laws?
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
go get 'em crabster.
i'm off to the beach (in the rain)
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008
Which is it, PONTI, supply and demand or price gouging?
The republican Attorney general says price gouging.
Kipplinger (eric?) said on a news report last week that if ONLY supply and demand were working on oil price, it would be around $90/barrel. The other $30 is speculators.
But, what the hell does a Kipplinger know about economics?
Here are some of your "sources" PONTI:
Achmed Chalibi
Curveball
Victoria Toesening
Pentagon plants working for the defense industry.
Armstrong the paid propagandist
"scientists" paid by oil companies.
EPA officials that quit after being exposed for malfeasance.
George Bush.
Yep, great sources of unbiased information.
BOO!
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
PONTI, your back must get all wore out moving the goal posts so often.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
It's all "supply and demand", nothing more to see here folks:
Gaylord Herald Times:
(It all started Feb. 14 when attorney Lawrence Friedman, a part-time Grayling area resident and Gaylord Gas customer, filed a class action suit on behalf of customers throughout the area, accusing Inergy of price gouging. Following a two-day court hearing six weeks ago in front of Judge Allen, a ruling came down immediately: violation of a state law that protects consumers, she said. AG Cox jumped on board a few days later with the same conclusion.
Of course, Inergy denied the allegation. "Propane prices are at or near their highest all-time levels consistent with the rise in the price of crude oil," proclaimed Gaylord Gas president Jim Cross in a prepared statement following Judge Allen's decision. "We do not pretend to understand or know how and why the energy market values crude oil at such high levels."
But Judge Allen and Cox didn't fall for that company line. The judge told Inergy to resolve the issue out of court pronto or face the consequences, and Cox used his authority by threatening to take legal action against Inergy for excessive pricing practices.
While Inergy officials were hiding behind the high price of crude oil to justify their exorbitant price reported to be as high as $4.39 a gallon, Cox opened up more barrels by citing a Michigan Public Service Commission report that showed the average residential price per gallon for propane in Michigan from Dec. 3, 2007 to Feb. 19, 2008, ranged from $2.33 to $2.45.
Even Kevin Johnson, president of Johnson Propane of Gaylord, testified in court as an expert witness that he wasn't aware of any wholesale price that would justify the high retail prices being charged by Inergy. He said he was unaware of the wholesale prices his competitors were paying. All he knew was the highest price his company had charged during the previous six months was $2.39 a gallon.
Grossly excessive pricing or price gouging by Inergy? You be the judge.
The end result was Inergy agreed to offer refunds, credits or special pricing offers to its gouged customers. Rebates or credits will be offered to customers who change companies and will need their gas and/or tank removed; customers who stay and are not on a special program will be able to sign up and receive propane at a capped price under $3 per gallon -- this according to a recent press release from Inergy. )
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
.....If I didn't know better, I'd suspect it was Exxon that was financing all of those anti-drilling protestors. How much oil company stock do you think Pelosi and her cohorts owns?
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
For the first time ever, I'm going to reveal a secret never before revealed!!!!!
The hard-core energy players, the anti-drilling pols and environut coalitions, & ESPECIALLY all oil co. executives, are ALL Global Warming devotees. Collectively, in a top-secret accord (The Gore-A- Cord) which I am privy to but sworn to secrecy (but under my real name), is that driving oil prices sky high is not only very, very good for profits, stocks, and option values, but also begins the process of reducing demand.
You see, it takes very high AND more importantly, sustained prices in order for us to convince folks to use LESS.....oil & gas.
So, please, CRABBIE & Wolfgang1, my bombast and making money in oil hand-over-fist, is all designed for your own good. Hope this makes you feel better and priviledged....you're among the few in-the-know about The Gore-A-Cord! This was Gore's genius, and I have to agree, only high prices and high profits, will do the trick: reduce consumption and encourage alternative energies--the other part of The Gore-A-Cord where we have significant investments feeding on subsidies....oink, oink....LOL all the way!
Posted by HAPPY3 at 05/11/2008
Lets make a deal;
I will list all of the oil refinery building permits that have been asked for in the last decade:
-0-
now, HAPPY and PONTI, you list all of the refineries that have been closed by consolidated energy companies in the same period...
go...!
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
(You see, it takes very high AND more importantly, sustained prices in order for us to convince folks to use LESS.....oil & gas.)
HAPPY the censored censorerererer
Gee Happy, maybe a "leader" that sets a real energy policy that encourages "CONSERVation", renewable non-food energy production and (gasp!) green job creation...
...might lead to the same result while keeping "national security" (ie: energy) prices consistent which is ....
...good for business!
duh! nope, that is just more hippy lie talk.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
HAPPY the censored censorerererer
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008 | ignore this person
i think someone at the nation takes sadistic delight at pulling hap's chain and booting him, knowing he'll just show back up in another numerical version, much like microsoft windows...lol
great running gag! within a year we'll be talking to HAPPY13.5 or something at this pace! lol
or...HAPPYXP...or...HAPPYVISTA...LOL...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/11/2008
i'm off to the beach (in the rain)
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008 | ignore this person
I was unaware Ontario has sea shore.
I bicycled the Cabot trail, "leading" a group of high schoolers. priceless.
Posted by emile duBois at 05/11/2008
or...HAPPYXP...or...HAPPYVISTA...LOL...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/11/2008
and just like microsofts monopolistic creations...he will only work 1/2 the time, require a staff to fix, need constant upgrades, need multiple de-bugging routines and be terrorized by viruses.
all the while talking out of the side of his ass about "competition" in the market of consolidations.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Emile, which state has the most shoreline, therefore most likely the most beaches, yet has no ocean front property?
Hint: same state that has "supply and demand" gas suppliers that deliver gas at 180% of what the contract specifies.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
errr, might have to eat some egg myself, Masks state might have more shore...
hmmm, might have to look that up..
off to Moms for some BBQ feastin'
Peace
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Hey CRABBIE, if you're so dissatisfied with Microsoft's products, why don't you stop using them?
Oh yeah, I forgot. You view most of the things in the world as yours by-right, to be given to you at a price you deem to be fair. This apparently includes oil, computers, computer software, propane, healthcare, and everything else you need or may require in the future. This makes you just like about every other Democrat I have ever known, who thinks the world owes them a living on THEIR terms.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
"I will list all of the oil refinery building permits that have been asked for in the last decade"
We all know that there have been ZERO new refineries built in the US over the last 30 years, primarily due to the environmental policies pushed by the Democrats in Congress that makes new refineries flat out unfeasible, at least in the US. And you want to blame this on WHO? You're starting to sound like MASK, who seems to want to blame the lack of a draft on George Bush...
This seems to be a pattern with you lefties, blame everyone else for the fruits of your own policies. Bizarre, yes, but as Orwell noted, to be a leftist requires this kind of absurdity to be built into one's thinking.
go...!
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
(Hey CRABBIE, if you're so dissatisfied with Microsoft's products, why don't you stop using them?)
1: near monopoly. My employer would be amused if I stopped using the computer.
2: at home I use an Apple.
(We all know that there have been ZERO new refineries built in the US over the last 30 years, primarily due to the environmental policies pushed by the Democrats in Congress that makes new refineries flat out unfeasible, at least in the US.)
As usual, you did not answer the question. How many permits have been applied for?
Why, none, Ponti.
How many working independent refineries have been mothballed after being purchased by consolidated energy companies?
Why, many, many, Ponti. Take some time and look it up. Or would it be easier for you to blame the liberals?
You are so deluded with misinformation it is impossible to debate you. You truly are one of the dumbest people I have ever interacted with.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
so, Ponti, do you think it is a "free market" perfectly reasonable business practice to sign a contract with a customer for a set price but then charge 180% more for the product?
do you think it is a good practice to go into court and claim that the fair market price is $4.39/gal when the real market price is no more than$2.49?
Is that why you enjoy paying contractors in Iraq to not perform work?
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
come on Ponti, find me an example of a company wanting to build a new refinery in the recent past that had a permit denied or even reached the permitting stage.
Can you back up your bullshit even once?
Here is something from a known librool media source...Bloomberg .com from a couple of years ago
(July 7 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating possible antitrust violations related to the planned closure of a Royal Dutch/Shell Group refinery in California, which has the highest gasoline prices in the continental U.S.
California has higher prices because the low-polluting gasoline blend required by state rules is made only by 13 in- state refineries, according to a May report from the University of California, Berkeley. The refinery in Bakersfield will be closed in October because it is not economically viable, according to Shell.
A U.S. General Accounting Office study released in May found that six oil industry mergers in the late 1990's lifted U.S. gasoline prices an average of 2 cents a gallon.
``The increased consolidation which we have found and the General Accounting Office has found and others have found makes it easier for these companies to engage in anti-competitive behavior,'' Tyson Slocum, research director for Public Citizen, a Washington-based consumer group, said in an interview.
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer and members of the state legislature have asked Shell to keep the facility open, saying that lack of competition in the state's refining business is lifting prices.
Gasoline pump prices touched a record $2.327 a gallon in California in May, while the nationwide average reached $2.036, also an all-time high, according to government data.
``We're looking at whether there is any antitrust misconduct associated with the decision to close'' the Bakersfield refinery, William Kovacic, the Federal Trade Commission's general counsel, said today at a hearing of the energy subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Reform on gasoline prices.
The GAO, the watchdog agency of Congress, found the mergers increased market concentration in the refining and sale of gasoline, leading to higher wholesale prices.
California gasoline prices are higher than elsewhere in the U.S. because of the limited refinery capacity, according to the University of California report by Severin Borenstein, James Bushnell and Matthew Lewis. The state has ``the potential for greater premiums due to the ability of some firms to exercise market power,'' the study concluded.)
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
Posted by crabwalk at 05/11/2008
"come on Ponti, find me an example of a company wanting to build a new refinery in the recent past that had a permit denied or even reached the permitting stage."
Why would a company seek a permit for a facility they know would not be economical?
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
You're funny, CRABBIE. Like most leftists, you consider the results of basic economic fact to be a conspiracy to screw you. Refineries are no longer built in the US, and existing ones are closed, simply because it is no longer to operate them here, because of the very policies you and your pathetic ilk advocate. Instead of recognizing this, you prefer to consider it all a conspiracy. Very funny. Sad, and pathetic, but funny.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
"The refinery in Bakersfield will be closed in October because it is not economically viable, according to Shell."
Which part of this sentence did you not understand, CRABBIE? I'm here to help!
Oh, did you say it's all a conspiracy of the oil companies, and their evil creation, basic economics, that you don't believe? Oh, sorry, can't help you with that. You need someone with psychiatric training.
Posted by pontificus at 05/11/2008
I was unaware Ontario has sea shore.
I bicycled the Cabot trail, "leading" a group of high schoolers. priceless.
Posted by emile duBois
ooh, cape breton......
one of my favourite beaches:
http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/on/pelee/index_E.asp
saw a lawrence's warbler today!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/11/2008