Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditCHICAGO -- "This is an election that is trying to set a paradigm for a progressive politics, post-meltdown candidacy," says Tom Geoghegan as braves lake-effect snow and diving temperatures in the frenzied finish to the most unlikely of congressional campaigns.
This talk of "paradigms" and "post-meltdown politics" reveals Geoghegan for who he is, an author and public intellectual who has spent a lifetime peddling ideas. And it begs the question: Has our politics changed enough to make possible the choice not just of a new member of Congress but of a new way of thinking about what progressivism advocates, about what Democrats should propose, about what Washington can do for America?
While a lot of Democrats are still busy complaining about George Bush, and a lot more are absorbed by the work of cleaning up the mess that the former president left behind when he helicoptered out of Washington, Geoghegan is knocking on the doors of bungalows and telling retirees they need a raise. This candidate is not proposing to "save Social Security," he wants to expand it -- providing recipients with a raise and creating a real national pension program.
Geoghegan does not propose to tinker with a broken health care system. He wants to "re-enact" Medicare -- for everyone," arguing that, "We should take our single-payer health-care system and just make it wall to wall."
Banks and bailouts and the credit crunch? Geoghegan starts with the basics: stop foreclosures and put a cap on abusive interest rates.
And so it goes, on issue after issue. Geoghegan runs in Tuesday's special election to replace Chicago Congressman-turned-White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel as a Democrat who is up off his bended knee, done offering apologies and ready to deliver that new paradigm.
At the doors, the soft-spoken and cerebral candidate takes the time to explain his ideas, answers questions patiently and enjoys the remarkable experience of watching as Democrats who have been taught to lower their expectations wake up to the fact that they can and should expect more. "People reach out and grab my arm, big smiles on their faces," says Geoghegan, "and they say: 'I'm for that! I'm for you!"
The question, of course, is whether a late-starting candidate with big ideas and an uncommon penchant for taking the time to explain them, a relatively small bankroll and a name so generally unknown that his literature and campaign pins feature pronunciation cues ("/gae-gun/") really make a dent in the most aggressively and edgily political city in the country?
It is appropriate that this testing of our political limits would take place in the first special election for a U.S. House seat since Chicagoan Barack Obama's "change we can believe in" election to the presidency. On the day after the vote, Obama plucked Emanuel, the congressman with the biggest elbows not just in Chicago but in Washington to serve as his chief of staff. And a seat with a checkered past of sending Chicago pols named Blagojevich and Rostenkowski to the Capitol became open.
An available congressional seat in Chicago always attracts a crowd. And the race for the 5th district seat representing north-side neighborhoods with rich and energetic political traditions has drawn the usual suspects -- and the unusual. Twenty-five candidates, most of them Democrats, are putting up street signs (the boulevards are festooned), buying television ads (seen by millions of viewers who cannot vote in what will be a low-turnout primary) and posing as superheroes (hey, anything to get noticed in a crowded competition).
There is even another public intellectual in the contest: former Economist magazine writer and University of Chicago professor Charlie Wheelan. He's the one in a superhero outfit.
The usual suspects, and the pool from which the likely winner of this race will be drawn, are the ward commiteemen, aldermen, commissioners and legislators with roots in the Democratic politics of this very Democratic city -- where you can still find folks who ask, "What did Blagojevich do wrong?" or tell you that: "Burris is doing O.K." For reasons that need not be explained in a state that has already impeached a governor this year, even the veteran politicians are running as reformers.
Unfortunately, the pols are not getting along. One frontrunner, Cook County Commissioner Michael Quigley, who has the backing of the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times newspapers, says it is "predictable and pathetic" that another frontrunner, State Representative Sara Feigenholtz, who has the backing of the Service Employees union and Emily's List, is accusing him of hanging out with the wrong political crowd. Feigenholtz has had to square the accusation with the news that the two sparring contenders used to date one another.
Then there is Tom Geoghegan, author of a transformative book on why liberal intellectuals who don't tend to get their hands dirty should be enthusiastic about trade unionism, Which Side Are You On? Trying to Be for Labor When It's Flat on Its Back, and a brilliant call for political reform, The Secret Lives of Citizens: Pursuing the Promise of American Life.
A decade ago, in an annual "best books of the year" review for The Progressive magazine, I named The Secret Lives of Citizens as the standout. Here's what I wrote:
Thomas Geoghegan's The Secret Lives of Citizens: Pursuing the Promise of American Life (Pantheon, 1999) presents the utopian pessimism of a battered progressive on the cusp of the twenty-first century.A labor lawyer from Chicago who moonlights as a perceptive essayist, Geoghegan wrote a fine book about American labor--Which Side Are You On?: Trying to Be for Labor When It's Flat on Its Back (Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1991)--at a time when the current resurgence of the trade union movement was nearly unimaginable.
Now he returns with an argument for the rebuilding of a progressive movement that is rooted in a faith in the possibilities of politics and government. Geoghegan comes out of the closet as an unreconstructed New Deal Democrat, a wide-eyed believer in the notion that citizens can still use democracy to forge communal solutions to the crises of our times. In doing so, he emerges as one of the angriest critics of Bill Clinton and the "New Democrats," who have turned the party of Roosevelt into a mushy advocate for "free trade," "market solutions," and a thousand other compromises.
"It is often said that the Democrats in the 1960s promised too much," he writes. "But in what way? If we wanted to eliminate poverty, we could have. If we wanted the median wage to rise in a broad and long-term way, we could do it. Most developed countries have essentially wiped out poverty. Over the decades, many of those countries had a true `continuous social improvement.'"
Why hasn't this happened in America?
Geoghegan suggests that it has a lot to do with a failure on the part of progressives to dream big dreams. In a democracy, he argues, the great danger for reformers is to offer too little. Toward the end of The Secret Lives of Citizens, Geoghegan quotes a sign from the Third World that in many senses sums up the plea of his text: "No more austerity! Give us promises!"
Tom Geoghegan is giving us promises, perhaps even the promise of a different politics.
His campaign is an uphill one, run out of a small storefront headquarters far from the bank towers of downtown Chicago, with not enough television advertising to be noticed by dollar-obsessed pundits, not enough endorsements from cautious unions and newspapers and not enough name recognition to presume even his supporters know how to pronounce "gae-gun."
But he has attracted the support of those Democrats who recognize the need not just talk about change but to demand it -- Dr. Quentin Young, the Chicago physician who has led the charge for national health care; former Chicago Councilman Leon Depres, the "liberal conscience of Chicago" who took a young Tom Geoghegan on as a law partner decades ago; brilliant Chicago political strategist and activist Don Rose, who with Geoghegan recognized the promise of Harold Washington's transformative Chicago mayoral campaigns; as well as the appropriately radical reformers of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee and Progressive Democrats of America.
No matter how this race finishes, Tom Geoghegan has begun to outline that new paradigm that, ultimately, will prove not merely to be visionary but to be necessary for the future of a political party and a nation that will not be repaired or renewed with half-steps and compromises.
Share this article
John Nichols
Breaking news and analysis on political, social, economic and cultural activism that mainstream media commonly ignore.
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
thanks for the pronunciation guide, lol...
sounds like a solid guy.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 11:39am
nice avoidance of the word "liberal" too...
it is indeed time to forge new paradigms, shuffle ideas and ceas the lockstep ideological tribalism that has ossified our polity and failed our people.
as a progressive conservative i reccomend (domestically) the path of otto von bismark, a conservative of the old, european order who defeated his leftist enemies by...stealing and implementing their social program ideas thereby ensuring the loyalty of the average schmuk germans through two world wars and avoiding the painful upheavals the change from below so often entail...
not too happy with the foriegn policy results of germany's socially progresive conservatism, nor the ubernationalism that enabled the horrors of the holocaust, but i think those nasties were more the result of a long and complex unique historical process and not otto's domestic social programs...
no problem with populist change from below, except that IMO change from below is often (usually?) an indication of a failure of a society's elites to anticipate timing and need for change and implementation of the same from above.
and lets face it, the moral rot in this country has been festering from the roots to the trunk, and all the way up to the highest leaves.
time for the republican party to rid itself of the anarcho uber libertarian lockstep ideology that has poisoned it and find a new way...
but all they can do is mindlessly cling to that failed satanic ideology that has poisoned our civilization as much as irresponsible, anything-goes liberalism and brought us to the brink of disaster.
yet still do they yip and yap like the ideologized randian intellectual lap dogs they are...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 12:24pm
NICHOLS: Geoghegan is knocking on the doors of bungalows and telling retirees they need a raise....he wants to expand it -- providing recipients with a raise..... they say: 'I'm for that! I'm for you!"
Hey, wow, I'm for that TOO!
In recent weeks, there has been more discussions w/mom on finances than the past 10 years! Her incomes from her stock & bond funds have tumbled and NEITHER she nor I, want to see her `eat' her principals, drastically diminished as they are and NO prospects of material recovery under Magic's `Spread the (much diminished remaining) Wealth' policies...
So, I would SUPPORT "raises" for SS recipients....and truth be told, would welcome the higher levels when my turn at the trough comes.....in less than a decade......good luck to Yom Geoghegan....since a Repub has no chance anyway.......YES to higher SS payments! Chump change in the world of $1 to $2 Trillion deficits!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 12:26pm
A Campaign. An Idea. ...
It is (W0)Man vs. (Chicago)Machine. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IL5thCD
Most say the IL 5th CD is too close to call. And I agree.
It is Democracy in action. Looking out the window, I see snow flurries and can imagine 25 political armies running about the IL 5th CD campaigning this weekend.
March 3 is 'D-Day' for the Dems. The Republicans and the Green Party will pick their own candidates for the April 7 runoff.
This Democracy thing, how could such a thing happen in Chicago?
Joe Lake, Chicago (Bucktown)
Posted by JoeLake at 03/01/2009 @ 12:34pm
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 12:26pm | ignore this person | warn this person
hey - the bubble has been growing for years, from reagan to the most recent bush...
actually i think reagan's supply side moves in the 80's were good ideas at the time. supply and demand - hard to understand economics without both. i just think we went too far under an ideologized economic fad and now need to slide back to concentrate on the demand side again, and more radically after the ESPECIALLY irresponsible policies of the last 8 years.
this allegiance to lockstep ideology, whether inflexible, morally relativistic socialism on the "left" or inflexible morally nihilistic randian objectivism on the "right", and the jerking left and right that the interplay of the two has made of our polity with conflicting appeals to the jaywalking marching morons of all social classes is...
unamerican, irrational, and leads to civilizational collapse.
while the left promised the ignorant masses something for nothing via a big government santa claus that would fix all the problems, the right has promised the same something for nothing via an invisible anarchic magical market forces santa claus...
both are lies for whether we tack left of right there is always a price for anything worthwile.
portability of pensions, some form of universal healthcare, support of long term profit building business that may require more than 4 to 8 years to show its value...such things are indeed largely the realm of pragmatic, competant public policy and that awful horrible old gubbament - societal insurance.
and yes, like any insurance policy they are not free...
but hell - what does a private health insurance policy for a family cost these days? and all those darned previous conditions!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 12:49pm
ibble, looks like it's just us this fine, sunny morning! More response to your 12:49pm later. You know I like math and here's something related....and affects EVERYONE:
February 27, 2009
I'd like my change back
Posted at: 10:13 am
When President Reagan proposed the 1982 budget, economists scoffed that it was a "rosy scenario" based on unrealistic GDP and employment forecasts. The economists were right.
However, Reagan's assumptions were based on the belief that the tax cuts would spur the economy. They did. It just took longer than he thought it would take for the effects to be felt. President Obama's rosy scenario is based on the apparent belief that the economy will be spurred by tax increases–an economic theory previously unknown.
Government receipts in his budget forecast are based on a decline in GDP of 1.2% in 2009 followed by an increase of 3.2% in 2010. How realistic is that?
Last quarter (which, since the government's fiscal year begins in October, was the first quarter of 2009) GDP fell by a whopping annualized rate of 6.2%. This quarter doesn't look any rosier:
.....Do the math. If in the first two quarters of FY2009 the economy falls at annualized rates of 6.2% and 6.0% respectively, that means for the total yearly decline to be only 1.2%, the economy will have to expand 3.7% in the second half of the year. That's not even remotely feasible. It is more likely that, best case, the economy in FY 2009 shrinks by 4%, and worst case, shrinks by 8%. The current estimate of a $1.75 trillion deficit this year is, therefore, likely to balloon well past $2 trillion,....
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 12:56pm
Any analysis of the proposed budget that finds fault will fall on deaf ears.
We have an administration that is driven by a belief that the Constitution is not just a collection of negative rights, or protections, but is an endless supply of positive rights, and, a belief that with the discovery of each positive right there is an obligation on the government to fund that right. Thus, each person (not just a citizen) is ultimately entitled to some level of financial support for every conceivable aspect of their life. The only argument left is how big that level will be, and how coercive the government will need to be in order to extract the level of funds needed.
Posted by sntauri at 03/01/2009 @ 1:12pm
.....reagan's supply side moves in the 80's were good ideas at the time. supply and demand - hard to understand economics without both. i just think we went too far under an ideologized economic fad and now need to slide back to concentrate on the demand side again, and more radically after the ESPECIALLY irresponsible policies of the last 8 years.....
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 12:49pm
I'm a hardcore believer in Reaganomics and Arthur Laffer and a die-hard Capitalist....just to get the disclosurers out of the way!
Innovators, entrepreneurs and capitalists must be given a growth-nurturing environment in order to increase the economic pie....and excepting a few episodes, America has been Reagan Country and in the process, created the wealthiest society for the largest AND MOST DIVERSE population on earth....not denying poverty exists here....just the fact of how wealthy we were (?are?) for a large country!
Had we stay focused on Gubber policies that focus first and foremost, on GROWTH, with honestly-debated costs to all the `issues' of the Left....we would've been fine and even wealthier as a whole than we are today....instead, we have cleaner air, water, Great Lakes to be proud of, labor protection (in the short term), more social `safety nets' (short term as well) which the upper half of our society enjoys far, far more.
Like most Leftists, you fall into the same mindset that the last 8 years are primarily to blame....since you admits to being a somewhat fan of Reaganomics which means you let it slide as to the 4 years of Bush I & Clinton's 8 years. Bush II's only crime is Alan Greenspan's keeping the interest rates too low after Clinton's tech bubble blew. As to whether GW could've forced Greenspan to do the unpopular, and let's face it....
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 1:13pm
.....and let's face it, raising rates are never popular even if absolutely necessary, as amply demonstrated most concretely by Paul Volker in killing the worst inflation any of us over 50 have ever experienced. It took two painful years, UNDER Reangan, to correct for the policies of Carter and the Arab's oil-induced inflation.
Looking ahead, the policies already approved by Congress and now being proposed by Magic, will shrink the economic pie more while changing the size of the pieces....there is no incentives anymore, for capitalists like me to get up the enthusiasm to take risks on genuinely growth activities.......just about all of my small-cap stocks, heavily in biotech, software and new media, are getting slaughtered....they will have a heck of a time to raise capital in the future...many won't survive, even those which have very little debt....they just won't have the time to reach critical mass and sustained profitability.
Not a pretty future!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 1:21pm
"Banks and bailouts and the credit crunch? Geoghegan starts with the basics: stop foreclosures and put a cap on abusive interest rates."
This is a perfect example of the average politician's deception. He either knows the truth and is lying, or he is woefully ignorant of basic economics.
Either way we lose. It is odd how many of you think that the government printing up fiat currency can rescue the economy. I hear people all the time talking about the "government" paying for this or that. Your eventual realization will be a brutal lesson. It will start with hyper inflation - as consumers (globlaly) begin to realize their US dollars are worthless and they begin to convert them into tangible assets.
This will end in totalitarianism. That is the historical result of the economic hubris we are seeing today.
And I believe it is being done purposefully.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 1:33pm
"Here is the problem the right has with the "new politicis" coming to power...progressive lunacy.
"This talk of "paradigms" and "post-meltdown politics" reveals Geoghegan for who he is, an author and public intellectual who has spent a lifetime peddling ideas. And it begs the question: Has our politics changed enough to choose not just a new member of Congress but a new way of thinking about what progressivism advocates, about what Democrats should propose, about what Washington can do for America?"
Notice the following where the congressional hopefull is armed with..."author, public intellectual(his opinin) who has spent a LIFETIME peddling ideas..
NOTICE.no experience...just ideas that we all shopuld run to...!!!GOD HELP US ALL.
and then, this gem...he...
asks the OPPOSITE question Kennedy asked of us..and says..
What can WASHINGTON DO FOR AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How about get a fucking job and experience? Get out of the way?
and this gem..
"his candidate is not proposing to "save Social Security," he wants to expand it -- providing recipients with a raise and creating a real national pension program. "
He wants to spend more of other peoples money without regard to who or how it is earned..and he wants the reigns of power.
THIS IS WHY WE HATE PROGRESSIVE POLITICS AND THINK THEY ARE SICK. IT WILL FINISH OFF AMERICA.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 1:47pm
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 1:13pm | ignore this person | warn this person Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 1:21pm | ignore this person | warn this person
hmmm...well, i don't only blame the last 8 years, though i DID hear an interesting stat on NPR's money program the other day...
apparantly the consumer debt in this country as a % of GNP has in the last 8 years surpassed that of any time since...1929...
ugh...
i also think much of our problem has involved absurdly optimistic expectations for growth based on the two decades following WW2 - a period of unnatural growth contingent upon hustorical peculiarities which ceased to exist sometime in the 1970's...
hey - would love to continue this and have many more observations to make but life is in the process of intervening.
later, ok?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 1:50pm
It will start with hyper inflation - as consumers (globlaly) begin to realize their US dollars are worthless and they begin to convert them into tangible assets.
This will end in totalitarianism. That is the historical result of the economic hubris we are seeing today.
And I believe it is being done purposefully.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 1:33pm
I agree and I agree with HAPPY...
Which is why I am looking overseas for growth and asset protection instead of expansion here at home for my... entrepeneur risk taking and wealth creating...
I am being driven into a change of activity decided by govt instead of my reacting to market forces..
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 1:54pm
How about get a fucking job and experience? Get out of the way? Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 1:47pm
Good advice from someone who seems to spend an inordinant amount of time writing comments on websites.
This will end in totalitarianism. That is the historical result of the economic hubris we are seeing today. Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 1:33pm
Scary!!! if it weren't coming from the minds of the sad and pathetic.
Posted by erazma at 03/01/2009 @ 2:14pm
Somewhere buried on page B8 in your local newspaper you'll see the news that Chinese speculator "tours" are flying to the US to purchase real estate.
Sure, what's special about that? Happens all the time...
Imagine all of China and the rest of the world for that matter deciding to act on the realization that the value of their trillions of US dollars is plummeting because of the inflationary actions of Congress.
They will do everything to dump those dollars into anything that will maintain value against inflation (so will we).
That's what is coming folks.
Do you really think the result for our country will be universal healthcare and expanded social security benefits?
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 2:22pm
Posted by erazma at 03/01/2009 @ 2:14pm
You don't understand it, do you? You are still seeing it as a liberal vs conservative world aren't you?
Good luck with that.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 2:24pm
The power structure still believes we can paper shuffle our way back into the status quo & revive the bubble economy that collapsed due to its inherent absurdity.
Lending institutions should be required to forgive the onerous balances owed by individual homeowners after the drop in home "values". Speculators & landlords should suffer their losses with dignity & seek spiritual succor.
"The nation that preys together stays together" is a corruption of the national ethic.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:27pm
apparantly the consumer debt in this country as a % of GNP has in the last 8 years surpassed that of any time since...1929...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 1:50pm
That's actually totally rational....if interests are low, artificial or not, more borrowing occurs......
Same in my own case & I can freely admit I borrowed more than had rates averaged higher....the difference is, many many folks bet only one way, that their house values and income, will rise uninterrupted.
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:31pm
Lending institutions should be required to forgive the onerous balances owed by individual homeowners after the drop in home "values".......
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:27pm
Do you have any idea how "Lending institutions" work? Their own equity capital is normally just 5~6% of their total assets....the balance is BORROWED in the form of deposits (CDs, business working capital, trust funds, their own commercial papers and bonds sold to pension funds and such, etc.)
Have any idea who relies on pension funds, working capitals, trust funds, etc.?
Pretty clear your fundamental IQ on the banking system is non-existent!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:38pm
Pretty clear your fundamental IQ on the banking system is non-existent!Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:38pm
Pretty clear your policy is to funnel unlimited billions into to the pockets of CEOs & their minions. Seek succor, sucker.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:52pm
Seek succor, sucker.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:52pm
I generally pay marginal attention to you.......now I know for sure, you can't help yourself, born stupid and strives to stay so....nice to make your acquaintance.
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:54pm
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:54pm
Likewise, I'm sure. Your untiring efforts to link your personal prosperity to the national good is laughable. The only time I read your comments is when they're rebutted by a progressive. Visual ignore, if you will.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 3:02pm
You don't understand it, do you? You are still seeing it as a liberal vs conservative world aren't you?
Good luck with that.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 2:24pm
No, I generally don't see the world as lib vs. con., but I am also not an end of days naysayer nor a conspiracy nut who believes "it is being done purposefully." Good luck with that.
I do believe, however, that the private and public sectors can work together towards a better world (that's called being an optimist, oh well). Clearly, there are things that the public sector can and must do. Also, just as clearly, the private sector is better at other things.
Frei, you rail against liberalism; it's difficult to see how you don't see the world that way. I'm probably just not as 'informed' or 'enlightened' as you, jomomma, happy et al.
Posted by erazma at 03/01/2009 @ 3:23pm
erazma,
What exactly is the Federal Reserve again? And don't go to their Website or Wikipedia to find out. That's like going to the Pentagon's Website for the truth about Iraq and Afghanistan.
I contend you don't really know what true purpose of the Federal Reserve, do you?
When I say you don't get it, I simply am observing that you aren't really very aware of the forces at work in our "economy".
It isn't a matter of "enlightenment" but it is a matter of being informed.
What saddens me is your belief that I don't share your optimism that private and public sectors can work together towards a better world. You just can't see that the current growth of our Federal Government is on a track to make that impossible.
You'll figure it out if you have the guts to actually question authority.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 3:49pm
Try reading Greider's "Secrets of the Temple" (he writes for the Nation, so YOU can trust him) or better and more toward the real truth behind today's headlines, read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by Griffin.
Or just keep "hoping for change" with the other millions too afraid to understand what's really going on.
Good luck with that.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 3:54pm
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:52pm
You have to understand (as I do not know how long you've been treated to Happy's prognostications) but this global meltdown we're in?
Happy missed it ...
" 'Good luck with that.'
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 2:24pm"
Your concerns relative to hyper-inflation are justified, just that we are not there, yet ...
Hyper-inflation is possible. So, yes all those whose remedy implies the mere ... printing of money, are indeed fools.
And yes, lot of the conversations here relative to the house of cards we help build, and to a large degree (because of our own ignorance) were dealt, economically speaking ... do not even begin to appreciate the times we are in.
That wiggle is not from the usual card somewhere being nudged out of place, and we are therefore just waiting for the structure to stop shaking, the steadied hand to nudge it back, no ...
No, that is just the first part of the shock-wave from the M80 lit in the basement. And no, the main part of the blast has not hit yet.
All the coded phrases have been spoken, code words dropped, lines drawn. A valid fear is that the American people have been so dumbed down they no longer have ears to hear them.
That their most efficient tool, their voice ... will remain too, diffuse. Their most efficient weapon, their numbers, un-organized, until a loaf of bread cost more than two handfulls of worthless paper.
And if you do not think such is on the other side of a fuck up by us, then you are tragically (in the classical sense, which is worse ...) mistaken.
Posted by V at 03/01/2009 @ 3:56pm
V,
I followed you, applauding on my feet until your last paragraph. I'm sorry, what are you trying to say in that last paragraph?
"And if you do not think such is on the other side of a fuck up by us, then you are tragically (in the classical sense, which is worse ...) mistaken."
Who do you mean by "us"?
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 4:02pm
It is almost unbelieveable, but some indication is that economic sanity may be returning to the extremist media after being blinded by the Obamanation fantasy ride to power!
"Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama's State of the Union speech and his budget.
He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.
That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all -- either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy's long-run potential to grow.
Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama's left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-and-spending program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.
This is nearly double the government-spending low-point reached during the late 1990s by the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton administration. While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.
Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts."
Now that they see the reality I expect more to follow! "Snuffleufagus" almost appeared actually thinking and questioning on his sideshow this morning!
Posted by comancheamerican at 03/01/2009 @ 4:15pm
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 12:56pm
"However, Reagan's assumptions were based on the belief that the tax cuts would spur the economy. They did. It just took longer than he thought it would take for the effects to be felt. President Obama's rosy scenario is based on the apparent belief that the economy will be spurred by tax increases–an economic theory previously unknown."
Historically, Republicans have been a party focused on instituting policies that create wealth, whereas Democrats have been focused on redistributing wealth. The Democrats's policies have always assumed that there would be wealth created by Republicans to redistribute. It appears at this point that Democrats have talked themselves into the idea that redistributing wealth actually creates it. It appears at this time that our society has reached a tipping point, where the number of people receiving benefits from the government is beginning to outweigh those contributing. The collapse could be very sudden indeed.
"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
--Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of Great Britain, 1979-1990.
Posted by pontificus at 03/01/2009 @ 4:18pm
It's so easy to run a populist/progressive campagign. All you have to do is promise to spend other people's money without regard to consequences.
There is no responsibility nor accountability involved. Run short, just raise taxes.
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 4:33pm
Pretty clear your policy is to funnel unlimited billions into to the pockets of CEOs & their minions. Seek succor, sucker.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 2:52pm
you think the economic problems stem from CEOs pay?
You must be one of those who didn't prepare himself for the real world. If you went on to a "higher" education you would believe your professors told you what the "truth" was in the real world, and now you find yourself in the REAL world with no demand for your "skills",which of course...leads to being paid by ther hour...so you hate CEOs...
Well, cheer up!!! the "new" economy of Obama, by the Democrats, and for the Progressives is fast on its way to you!!
The CEO problem of yours will be solved, for he too, will make hourly wages and then be gone!!... along with the companies they are suppose to run..so you will be happy being the same as everyone elses..working in the peoples fair economy..paid by the hour, of course...so, cheer up, comrade.
and the CEOs?
The will have quit along with all those in the private industries...
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 4:33pm
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 4:33pm
Don't forget "hope" and "change"!!!!
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 4:34pm
Don't forget "hope" and "change"!!!!
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 4:34pm
Good luck with that.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 4:45pm
THIS IS WHY WE HATE PROGRESSIVE POLITICS AND THINK THEY ARE SICK. IT WILL FINISH OFF AMERICA.----Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 1:47pm
So it IS about hate? I thought that was just for "Bush Derangement Syndrome", John??!??!?
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 4:45pm
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 4:33pm
Hey, Larry...good news-
Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the CPAC convention!
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 4:46pm
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 2:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person
multiplied by "a whole bunch" it burst.
i know, oversimplification, but...
like i said above - some of the libertarian ideology is solid, based on solid evidence.
but its like red wine...a glass or two a day is good for you, but ten is not...
to me, a benevolent pragmatist, economics is like diahrea and constipation...just because intestinal safe draino works for constipation dont mean you should swig it for the opposite...not fun...
i think we need to swing now over to the lefty side a bit, follow the keynesian model SOME, and give venture capitalists opportunities to get onto the ground floor of the new green industrial tech wave.
once the demand side is stabilized and comforting conservative continuity is reestablished, we can swing marketward again.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 5:01pm
Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the CPAC convention!
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 4:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i'm gonna run for the republican nomination. i think i got a shot...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 5:02pm
Who do you mean by "us"?
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 4:02pm
Human Beings.
Posted by V at 03/01/2009 @ 5:07pm
"...give venture capitalists opportunities to get onto the ground floor of the new green industrial tech wave."
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 5:01pm
Dunno about that one Ibb, VC investements can get pretty risky. They've been "on the ground" for quite some time now and invested a lot of capital and yet, they still haven't been able to tap into the "demand artery".
One note - transmission lines costs a pretty penny and the only way to pay them is through higher taxes and/or higher rates - something the tax payers hates. (I should know GA Power lobbied the PSC for another damn rate hike to help pay for 2 nuclear sites at a cost of an addtional $1.30 per month, on top of last year's rate hike of $3.00 per month. I getting getting sick of this crap!)
On a better note - my baby will be home in 7 weeks - thank the lord :-)
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 5:24pm
Human Beings.
Posted by V at 03/01/2009 @ 5:07pm
Ah, thanks. Bravo!
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 5:31pm
"i'm gonna run for the republican nomination. i think i got a shot..."
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 5:02pm
I'd vote for you anytime. ;-)
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 5:35pm
On a better note - my baby will be home in 7 weeks - thank the lord :-)
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 5:24pm
Amen!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 5:36pm
And the CEOs? They will have quit along with all those in private industries. Posted by yojo
The avaricious CEOs are just the head of a rotting fish, along with the war profiteers,the health care for profit indifferent, realty speculators, unwitting investors etc. You can fill in the blanks. You've been squatting on these threads long enough.
Invest wisely. Avoid pain in the future. Moderation in business practice as well as at table. Don't be called a greedy pig. Learn to live with yourself.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 5:41pm
V: Happy missed it ...
Not entirely true.....I went much heavier into cash in late spring & early summer and yes, part of that was taking profit in the energy sector.
Still, even if I "missed it" more, no big deal....hardly in the minority.......if I can't afford to lose, I don't play.
Anybody took note that Berkshire's Class A stocks dropped by almost HALF, to something like $75k per share from almost $150k...OUCH! Makes HAPPY's Class A--a miniturized version of the conglomerate that is Berkshire--loss of around 20% look downright sparkling!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 5:43pm
mask,
Hate the policy but love be policy maker.
Don't try to go long on this Mask, it ain't that deep.
I will even make it easier for you ... Hate he sin love the sinner.
Your posts always seem to be looking for something the author never intended since you always pluck a fragment out of contxt.
And you do this to left and right posters.... Fairness Doctrine of sorts?
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:02pm
Hey, Larry...good news-
Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the CPAC convention!
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 4:46pm
meaningless-he won it in 07 and 08 also.
That said, just to answer you ahead of time, I would vote 3rd party. I said the same thing to a party fund raiser who called me this week asking for money.
I told them that until the party decides to be conservative again, I won't send them a dime (the same answer I have given for the past 5 years).
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 6:02pm
I told them that until the party decides to be conservative again, I won't send them a dime (the same answer I have given for the past 5 years).
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 6:02pm
I got a call this morning, from a non-profit I regularly donated to. They miss me (but I think my money more)! I told them, President Obama is stepping into my place and I'm not worthy to compete for their `love' anymore....:)
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 6:07pm
Sore,
We all get it from you ...anything profit is bad. Apparently you must be nowhere near profits, which explains the complete lack of understanding of profits or what is involved in earning one.
Time for your break? As I use to say young Will and the idiot from No Texas sitting at a desk making no sales..... Fries are up!!!!
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:08pm
Acook,
Thank you and your son for your service. It is and was righteous and a good thing to do.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:11pm
My limited understanding tells me that the basic job of the fed is setting monetary policy (yet I'm sure it's far more nefarious than that). Hyperinflation is a grave concern. I guess we could go back to the gold standard. We could create a set standard whereby we eliminate govt. borrowing and eliminate corporate welfare and any social safety net. In this respect, I suppose, the left and right could all win...or lose.
I understand that we cannot print or borrow our way out of our current fiscal difficulties. I also know that the idea that we have static debts and assets isn't true either. Yet, I find it difficult to see any conspiracy by the fed and the adminstration to create the conditions by which we become a totalitarian state.
I will, however, wait with bated breath to have posters here speak truth to power and to make the case that our society is doomed by Obama's stimulus package.
Frei, How could I think that you don't have optimism that the public and private sectors can work together when you basically agree with others who say we are doomed?
Posted by erazma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:43pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:08pm
To the contrary, yojo. I owned & operated a used bookstore for 18 years in a provincial town & lived on the profits made therefrom.
There were many opportunities to rip the buying public. Once a couple began stacking 100 year old, cheaply bound reprints & whispering that "these are 1st editions". Overhearing them, i calmly told them the books were not investments, but good reading stock & priced fairly (low). The couple returned a perturbed look my way, left the stack of books on the floor & slowly made their way toward the door. I had rained on their parade, but I could live with myself in the process.
Many a time I was offered a valuable book, only to tell the seller that I couldn't afford to buy. Sometimes they sold anyway, taking what I could offer. Yes, I once sold a signed Honus Wagner baseball book for several hundred dollars. I easily met my overhead that month.
The first couple years, other dealers raided the shop, hauling away bargains. This was pre- internet & reference libraries were expensive & voluminous. Experience dictated selling prices & at that time, I had little. But the out of towners had the customers & I didn't. We both made out.
Now, it's a buyers market, but good for rural booksellers who can move locally unwanted material over the net.
But the expanding real estate market pushed me out of retail, as it has so many others. And the Chamber of Commerce raved about all the high rollers moving their businesses into town. Big money gone wild.
Think for awhile about all the fallen mom & pop businesses. Should only the wealthy have specialty stores?
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 6:50pm
I commend you ok being an honest businessman. We need more of those. One of my ventures is in the jewelry business... I sell the closeouts to TV, Internet and small wholesaler.....the equivelent if GM, Ford, andChru went under 3 years ago and the rat is now in Asia. TheMmerican market used be in Ny and RI... Then the unions moved in and priced the product out if the market.
Now Asia jewlery and exports are collapsing and the US will be a manufacturer again.. Unless our govt taxes,spends and kills off incentive and the currency... Both of which Obana just signed into law.
And why I am now exporting into Asia American items and will grow rich. And not by taxing me 50% or my company.but by expending into business friendly markets. Especially today.
Asia is going capitalist and we are going socialist. Growth will be killed off here ad it flourishes in Indus and China.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 7:08pm
Posted by erazma at 03/01/2009 @ 6:43pm
Never used the word doomed.
But we are on the wrong track right now, in my humble opinion.
Posted by freiheit1 at 03/01/2009 @ 7:29pm
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 5:02pm
I'd vote for you anytime. ;-)
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 5:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person
if yer really a black female (MASK has his doubts) and can survive vetting better than i could...
i'll consider you for a VP slot.
but ya gotta pay to play, baby!
LOL
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 7:36pm
Posted by antisocialist at 03/01/2009 @ 6:02pm
Tell everybody the REAL reason you won't vote for Romney, Larry.
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 7:49pm
Tell everybody the REAL reason you won't vote for Romney, Larry.
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 7:49pm | ignore this person | warn this person
HE'S A BIGAMIST HERETIC! BURN THE WITCH!!!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 7:58pm
hey MASK, think i got a shot at the republican nomination?
is ACOOK really a black female?
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 8:00pm
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 7:36pm
Hey, I can be bipartisan. At least my taxes are current! LOL
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 8:29pm
Attention, Obamabots, attention! Your presence is required in Los Angeles......Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has wondered off of the farm and needs to be lassoed and brought back to sanity....LOL!
L.A. budget gap could hit $1 billion
City already faces $427-million shortfall, which could more than double due to pension fund problems.
By Phil Willon
February 28, 2009
Los Angeles could face nearly a $1-billion shortfall by 2010 because of a mammoth bailout needed for the city's employee pension funds, which have seen investments tank in the spiraling national recession, according to a city budget report released Friday.
The grim forecast of a $983-million budget gap came as Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa already was considering widespread city layoffs and deep cuts to services because of the worsening financial crisis. The mayor is also exploring whether to privatize the Los Angeles Zoo and leasing city parking garages and meters, which could raise hundreds of millions of dollars. The total budget this year is $7 billion.
"The deficit and the economy are the biggest challenges we face right now," Villaraigosa told a roundtable of Latino journalists at City Hall on Friday. "This is going to be the most serious effort to reduce the size of government . . . because we have no other options."....
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 9:08pm
Maybe LA should consider spending cuts?
Naw......
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 9:11pm
From John Hinderaker at Power Line:
Voters Skeptical of Dems' Leftward Lurch
March 1, 2009 Posted by John at 6:57 PM
Inside the Beltway and the media bubble, Barack Obama is still the man of the hour.....The Democrats obviously believe that they are in a unique historical moment, of which they can take advantage by moving the country decisively to the left.
There is strong evidence, however, that the American people are not excited about the Dems' leftward lurch. Last week, President Obama...unveiled his administration's first budget. What happened? His approval rating declined.
Scott Rasmussen has been tracking Obama's "approval index," which is the difference between those who "strongly approve" of his performance and those who "strongly disapprove." Today the approval index declined to + 8, the lowest level in Obama's brief tenure in office.
Overall, 58 percent approve of Obama's performance so far, while 40 percent disapprove. As we've said before, that's not bad, but it's nothing special for a newly-elected President. Jimmy Carter was more popular at this stage of his administration.
What's happening here is that, while media types swoon over Obama's way with a teleprompter, voters are focusing on something else--the consequences of higher taxes, unprecedented federal spending and control over the economy, and crushing levels of debt. The more they focus on those things, the less they like them.
Most voters will give the Democrats the benefit of the doubt for now. But as the ill effects of the Dems' policies confirm voters' skepticism, the stage may be set for a decisive revulsion against the Democrats far-left program.
=========================
P.S. to MASK: Rasmussen had the most accurate polling right up to the Election!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 9:19pm
On a better note - my baby will be home in 7 weeks - thank the lord :-)
Posted by ACook at 03/01/2009 @ 5:24pm
Almost missed that! Congradulations on that forseeable joyous occassion! It is great so many gladly serve the nation so well!
Posted by comancheamerican at 03/01/2009 @ 9:40pm
NEW YORK, March 1 (Reuters) - The U.S. government threw a new $30 billion lifeline to American International Group Inc Sunday as the embattled insurer prepared to report the biggest quarterly loss in corporate history.
AIG's board approved a new rescue package that also includes more lenient terms on a government investment in its preferred shares and a lower interest rate on a government credit line, two sources familiar with the matter said.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/01/2009 @ 10:39pm
Louisiana to seek New Orleans-Baton Rouge passenger rail line from federal stimulus pot that Jindal called wasteful
by Robert Travis Scott, The Times-Picayune
Saturday February 28, 2009, 8:00 AM
BATON ROUGE - Louisiana's transportation department plans to request federal dollars for a New Orleans to Baton Rouge passenger rail service from the same pot of railroad money in the president's economic stimulus package that Gov. Bobby Jindal criticized as unnecessary pork on national television Tuesday night.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/01/2009 @ 10:50pm
Frosty,
Saturday February 28, 2009, 8:00 AM
BATON ROUGE - Louisiana's transportation department plans to request federal dollars for a New Orleans to Baton Rouge passenger rail service from the same pot of railroad money in the president's economic stimulus package that Gov. Bobby Jindal criticized as unnecessary pork on national television Tuesday night.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/01/2009 @ 10:50pm
I drive it frequently..84 miles on I-10 at 75 mph. Thats it.
Big Fuckin' waste and all there know it.
A rail would cost hundreds of millions and not ever fill up a train. A waste of money for sure...a rail would make more sense to Jackson, Miss or to Dallas, TX, or Mobile, AL..but this is a joke..
Look at a map before posting what looks like a criticism by you of Jindal. It makes you look ignorant and foolish.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:13pm
Jindal reminds me of the repubs who buy a house & get it on the HUD list & then proceed to rent it to a relative. If the darn gubmints gonna have them socialistic programs then by golly they're gonna get some of their tax dollars back.
I'm sure Jindal's initial reluctance to take stimulus dollars will be understood by his constituency in this light. If the 'bubs don't get something the libruls will take it all.
Principle & integrity galore, Mr. Jindal.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 11:19pm
Louisiana to seek New Orleans-Baton Rouge passenger rail line from federal stimulus pot that Jindal called wasteful
by Robert Travis Scott, The Times-Picayune
Saturday February 28, 2009, 8:00 AM
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/01/2009 @ 10:50pm
Hey, frosted one! Today's Chronicle listed the Houston area's congressional delegaton's individual count of pork in the Magic Pork Bill....guess which one led the way?
Ron Paul, with 22 earmarks totaling almost $100 million! Atta boy, Ron! IF money is to be wasted, waste it right here in Houston!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 11:25pm
"Jindal reminds me of the repubs who buy a house & get it on the HUD list & then proceed to rent it to a relative."
Nope...that is rent control on the UYpper east and west side of NYC..where good liberals pay $300 a month rent on rent controled appartments....as they own the buildings...
"Principle & integrity galore, Mr. Jindal.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 11:19pm
Yes, he does have that,for he certainly doesn't have the gift of a silver coated forked tongue to send liberals into orgasm or peeing down their legs..but the guy is honest and will clean up LA, which has had problems for 2 hundred years...(total dem control..think Katrina repairs)
and by turning down waste that everyone knows is waste IS a definition of integrity and principle...galore, Mr Soreass.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:26pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:26pm
You know, you spend an inordinate amount of time on these blogs for a guy trying to get rich. I think you're a f**king phony. You ain't got shit.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 11:33pm
FZ,
Did you ever talk to your bro about his son out in Alberta?
Any or all of you, take a look and read up......March issue of Nat'l Geographics, Pages 34 - 59, "The Canadian Oil Boom...Tar sands yield millions of barrels-but at what cost?"
I'm in the middle of reading it....damned informative and not overly EnviroNazish! We're going to need a whole lot of it!
One fascinating tidbit....them 400-ton capacity Caterpillars with 8-ft tires, they burn 50 gallons of diesel per hour, 24/7, and need new tires every 6 months!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 11:33pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:26pm
You know, you spend an inordinate amount of time on these blogs for a guy trying to get rich. I think you're a f**king phony. You ain't got shit.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 11:33pm
Who cares what you think?
And you will never know, will you?
Hint:
I am not paid for how much time I spend at work..I am paid for what I know, what I accomplish and what I produce on the bottom line..sometimes the pay off is huge...and sometimes not so big...sometimes zero..but I am ALWAYS THE LAST ONE PAID.
I do a lot of business over seas selling American products to China and others, and pay my own expenses for this...you do the math...another hint....my air fares alone are over $5-7k per trip...just for the seat...and I stay for weeks...
and what I do there covers 4 guys here in the US right now(so far)these are NEW jobs..2 just starting this month at $50k a year...it will be 10 teams of 2 each here in the US if our plan works by December...
How are you doing? providing any jobs? or are you just one of the many millions waiting for something to happen? Waiting for Obama to save your sorry unqualified unemployable ass? HMMM?
Tell us all, oh wise and savey progressive, just how are YOU contributing to the cause of helping Obama and America..exactly?
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:45pm
One fascinating tidbit....them 400-ton capacity Caterpillars with 8-ft tires, they burn 50 gallons of diesel per hour, 24/7, and need new tires every 6 months!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 11:33pm
I saw a program on CNBC that those tar sands have more oil in it than the entire ME..and that America and Canada will be giant oil/energy producers in the future...
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:53pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:45pm
In China huh? You're lucky the Chairman's no longer around. The hot poker treatment would make the pain in your heinie from any hot regional food intake seem tame indeed.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/02/2009 @ 12:01am
I saw a program on CNBC that those tar sands have more oil in it than the entire ME..and that America and Canada will be giant oil/energy producers in the future...
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:53pm
The article states that proved reserves are at 300 billion, second to Saudi Arabia and that total reserves is at 1.7 Trillion.....of course, the higher the price of oil, the more will be moved into the "proved" column. That's just in Alberta.
US oil shales also have hundred of billions of barrels.....but extraction/commercializing is another magnitude more complex and costly.....I can see why Exxon bailed out at Battlement Mesa in the 1980s'. I hope research and small scale projects continue.....and some of that Pork money head to the Rockies.
Posted by Happy at 03/02/2009 @ 12:03am
complex and costly.....I can see why Exxon bailed out at Battlement Mesa in the 1980s'. I hope research and small scale projects continue.....and some of that Pork money head to the Rockies.
Posted by Happy at 03/02/2009 @ 12:03am |
My father in law supplied the shale oil project in Hayden Co...said there is so much oil there, plus N Dak,S Dak, Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, Wyoming...to run the US needs for 200 years....needs steady $200 barrel pricwe to hold in order to be viable...also, new cleaner process not so water dependent for shale oil extraction is on line now...
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/02/2009 @ 12:36am
In China huh? You're lucky the Chairman's no longer around. The hot poker treatment would make the pain in your heinie from any hot regional food intake seem tame indeed.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/02/2009 @ 12:01am
childish.
China is becoming more capitalistic, and therefore opening up on all levels and your types are bring the US the other way..
But you never answered the question..
Forget your obsession with anal tortures...no one commented on your sexual perversions..
but, I will repeat..
"Tell us all, oh wise and savey progressive, just how are YOU contributing to the cause of helping Obama and America..exactly?"
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/02/2009 @ 12:40am
Oops..Not $200.....BUT
$100 A BARREL oil cost.....sorry.
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/02/2009 @ 12:41am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 03/01/2009 @ 8:00pm
She says, so I'll believe it.
Posted by Mask at 03/02/2009 @ 07:32am
I am hereby designating April as UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS HISTORY MONTH
Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 03/02/2009 @ 08:23am
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 5:43pm
"V: Happy missed it ..."
"Not entirely true.....I went much heavier into cash in late spring & early summer and yes, part of that was taking profit in the energy sector."
Gold would have been better ... also I was speaking in terms of the discernment of recent (I remember the conversation where I was speaking of the blowout in the machine tool sector, and the effects of same, as a for instance ...) and present macro economic trends. I guess it was the lefty in me, as I spoke in terms of the Republic ... our Nation, like you try to do now.
And in that context, you missed it.
Look at what you reference(d). You do not think or speak in terms of the/a, real ... I.E. physical economy (like the real player-players are forced ... to do, by definition) and as such, Happy, you are in point of fact missing it now ...
Posted by V at 03/02/2009 @ 08:50am
Look at a map before posting what looks like a criticism by you of Jindal. It makes you look ignorant and foolish. Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:13pm
i'm not the one asking for the voodoo money.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/02/2009 @ 09:31am
Ron Paul, with 22 earmarks totaling almost $100 million! Atta boy, Ron! IF money is to be wasted, waste it right here in Houston!
Posted by Happy at 03/01/2009 @ 11:25pm
lol.
Posted by frosty zoom at 03/02/2009 @ 09:32am
Tell everybody the REAL reason you won't vote for Romney, Larry.
Posted by Mask at 03/01/2009 @ 7:49pm
Pick me, Mask, pick me!!! It wouldn't have anything to do with the Mormon version of Christianity?
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 03/02/2009 @ 12:45pm
Stock market down another 300 points today, that's a 30 percent loss since the Obamanation! How's everybody enjoying hopey-changiness so far?
"There are two types of people in America today: those who remember what the Carter years were like, and those who are about to find out." - anonymous internet poster
Next up: roaring inflation, sky high interest rates, sky high taxes (not a problem for most lefties, I know!), and sky-high unemployment. All with a heavy dose of international humiliation and catastrophe! On the way!
Posted by pontificus at 03/02/2009 @ 4:17pm
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 03/02/2009 @ 12:45pm
Why that's exactly right!
lvlib/anti-socks would not vote for Romney because of his religion!
See Mitt is a "Temple Mormon" and as all paranoid right-wing Christians know from "former cult members", TMs want to destroy REAL Christianity!
Posted by Mask at 03/02/2009 @ 11:21pm
<i>Posted by Mask at 03/02/2009 @ 11:21pm </i>
Does Wolfgang get a sticker? :D
Posted by Thrawn at 03/03/2009 @ 01:04am
Posted by Thrawn at 03/03/2009 @ 01:04am
I'm kind of old-fashioned....I give out the old "gold stars"! (Anybody here still old enough to remember those?)
Posted by Mask at 03/03/2009 @ 08:58am
Posted by YourJomamma at 03/01/2009 @ 11:26pm
You know, you spend an inordinate amount of time on these blogs for a guy trying to get rich. I think you're a f**king phony. You ain't got shit.
Posted by Sorelish at 03/01/2009 @ 11:33pm'
i concur, but forget about him. he can take his "business" to bora bora for all i care. the point here is that someone with progressive ideas is giving it a shot in of all places chicago. don't let these nineteenth century sad sacks who post obnoxious reaganoid talking points ad nauseum here distract from that. arguing with them is pointless.
Posted by kennyboy at 03/03/2009 @ 10:21am
On Monday, the Dow Jones industrial average plunged far below the 7,000 mark to end at 6,763 -- the lowest close for the Dow since April 25, 1997. The 300-point drop Monday leaves the index more than 52 percent below its record high of 14,164.53 set in October 2007.
"The stock market is sort of like a tracking poll in politics. It bobs up and down day-to-day," Obama said. "And if you spend all your time worrying about that, then you're probably going to get the long-term strategy wrong." -B. Hussein Obama
Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement. Economic wounds must be healed by the action of the cells of the economic body - the producers and consumers themselves. -Herbert Hoover-
Now we have TWO wieners for posterity!!!
Posted by comancheamerican at 03/03/2009 @ 6:19pm
See Mitt is a "Temple Mormon" and as all paranoid right-wing Christians know from "former cult members", TMs want to destroy REAL Christianity!
Posted by Mask at 03/02/2009 @ 11:21pm
"Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p.167); "Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." - Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, 10:127
"...the Book of Mormon remains secure, unchanged and unchangeable, ...But with the Bible it was not and is not so....it was once in the sole and exclusive care and custody of an abominable organization (Christianity), founded by the devil himself, likened prophetically unto a great whore, whose great aim and purpose was to destroy the souls of men in the name of religion. In these hands it ceased to be the book it once was." - Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, The Joseph Smith Translation, pp. 12, 13
"...all the priests who adhere to the sectarian religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels." - Prophet Joseph Smith , The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith Jr., editor, vol.1, no.4, p.60
Parley P. Pratt (Mormon Apostle) "The false and corrupt institutions, and still more corrupt practices of `Christendom,' have had a downward tendency in the generations of man for many centuries ...The overthrow of those ancient degenerate races is a type of that which now awaits the nations call `Christian,' or in other words, `the great whore that sitteth upon many waters" (Key to the Science of Theology, 1938 ed., pg.106
Posted by antisocialist at 03/03/2009 @ 6:41pm
"Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...
Posted by antisocialist at 03/03/2009 @ 6:41pm
Amen.
And you thought mormons were clueless.
Posted by Malcontent at 03/03/2009 @ 10:40pm
<i>Posted by antisocialist at 03/03/2009 @ 6:41pm </i>
OK...so the grand conclusion of this is that "Temple Mormons" believe Christianity to be a false religion. I'm pretty sure they hold this in common with adherents of many other religions besides Christianity. Their opposition might be stronger, but this still doesn't prove your claim that they're actively trying to destroy the Christian church. When was the last time you heard of any such effort?
In order for your position to remain consistent, you have to vote against anyone from a religion other than Christianity so long as they have a beef with Christianity (regardless of whether that would actually influence their policy). Actually, it's worse than that. You're not just an adherent of Christianity in general; you're tied to a specific sect of it (as most Christians, in one way or another, are). That means that anyone who strongly disapproves of your specific BRAND of Christianity ALSO loses your vote. Basically...I don't see how your position doesn't create a pretty vicious regress.
Posted by Thrawn at 03/03/2009 @ 10:46pm
We should understand that if some conflicts do not effect us directly, indirectly we are all effected as a species that seems to work hard against its own survival. I found some very interesting thoughts on this subject in the book called The Age of Nepotism, you should look it up and read about current affairs in the world from the perspective of Iranian American entrepreneur traveling through the Balkans. There is also a site www.theageofnepotism.com
Posted by nikolina at 03/04/2009 @ 05:36am