Friedman on ‘drill, drill, drill’: It’s like someone chanting ‘IBM Selectric typewriters’ during the IT revolution.
Friedman on ‘drill, drill, drill’: It’s like someone chanting ‘IBM Selectric typewriters’ during the IT revolution.
On NBC’s Meet The Press this morning, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman criticized the chanting of “drill, drill, drill” and “drill, baby, drill” at the Republican National Convention last week, saying that’s just what Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela and Nigeria want to hear Americans focusing on. “They’d be up there leading the chant. They would be saying, ‘this is great, America isn’t sitting there saying, invent, invent, invent new renewable energy,’” said Friedman. Friedman added that he isn’t opposed to offshore drilling, but we shouldn’t be “making that the center focus”:
FRIEDMAN: I’m actually not against drilling. What I’m against is making that the center of our focus because we are on the eve of a new revolution, the energy technology revolution. It would be, Tom, as if on the eve of the IT revolution, the revolution of PCs and the internet, someone was up there standing and demanding, “IBM Selectric typewriters, IBM Selectric typewriters.” That’s what “drill, drill, drill” is the equivalent of today.
Watch it:
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
100 Responses to “Friedman on ‘drill, drill, drill’: It’s like someone chanting ‘IBM Selectric typewriters’ during the IT revolution.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Odd hearing this from Friedman
Is he attempting to save his reputation after promoting his insane Free Market crap for years?
September 7th, 2008 at 4:10 pmHow in the hell did MSM let this message get out? /snark off
I cannot imagine the kind of low intellect it takes to believe drilling will bring down energy costs much less solve energy problems. It will only further the profits of oil companies and Halliburton and other Bush/Cheney friends at the expense of the rest of us.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:13 pmWhat I’m against is making that the center of our focus because we are on the eve of a new revolution, the energy technology revolution.
Well, even Thomas Friedman understands it now.
I wonder how many Friedman Units it will take for the rest of the conservative movement to catch up to him, if they ever do.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:15 pmGood points, all. And now if we can DRILL, DRILL, DRILL it into the heads of the voting public that alternatives will work if we can concentrate on new technology and actually put people to work doing it!!!
Remember that McCain and all around him depend on FEAR. You'll freeze to death if we don't drill! They want oil money---it's as simple as that.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:32 pmUnfortunately there are PLENTY of managers out there who still think the PC is some kind of magic typewriter their secretary uses for letters, that needs no white out, and sends letters magically without a stamp. I work for two.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:35 pmAll I can think of when I see this headline is, "SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM..."
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7673063771712251153&ei=3zvESN29MYaC-wG0nLy8BQ&q=SPAM+SPAM+SPAM&vt=lf&hl=en
September 7th, 2008 at 4:38 pmI'm not the least bit surprised to see the Republican base gravitate towards the most obsolete and ineffective solution to the energy problem. After all, many of these same people believe the earth is 6000 years old.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pmFriedman's always been a technophile--like George Gilder and other conservative/corporate types. (Not to mention Science fiction right wingers like Jerry Pournelle.)
They've all been thrown out of the Republican Party, though.
He's dead right here, though--and it's a point that deserves repeating. What happens when we alip into the Second World, and are thought of as equivalent to China and India, because we have a government that kowtows to the local aristocracy?
September 7th, 2008 at 4:43 pmThat's a great way of putting it by T.F. and I haven't heard anyone else come up with a catchier way of looking at it.
Way to go.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:44 pmWhy must the tv media give print media another forum to shoot their mouths off. Friedman has a column to air is inane babble. Why is he always on tv as well? I'm so sick and tired of these daily/weekly news shows being nothing but a host and his mentally challenged buddies have a conversation. How about finding out what books Palin wanted banned from the city library when she was mayor. How about discussing the real reason for the decline in violence in Iraq. How about what the new president in Pakistan means for America. How about talking to reporters from other countries that have been in Iraq for years and really know what is going on there.
Friedman can suck on this. Disappear you know nothing assclown. You to Brokaw.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:44 pmDrill, Drill, Drill and Bomb, Bomb, Bomb are the Republican neocon's answer to policy and just about anything else. That is why our nation and our Earth are in such peril now.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:58 pmI’m not the least bit surprised to see the Republican base gravitate towards the most obsolete and ineffective solution to the energy problem.
You seem to miss the point - the military-industrial complex, of which oil is a major component, is making BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of dollars out of the current policies.
This has nothing to do with anything else - their pandering to the religious right has nothing to with sincere believes in anything other than putting a coalition together that will elect politicians to do their dirty work.
Let's not get distracted by the sideshow and follow the money trail - people that KILL a million or more people for oil actually have no spiritual conscious at all.
It is really just all about greed and gettin' what you can while the gettin' is good.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:24 pmAnd they don't actually have to win elections now either - 2000 and 2004 were clearly stolen (and the dems didn't say or do anything).
They just pander to the right and their make-believe "values voters" to provide justification and talking points to cover the elections they steal.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:27 pmWhy oil companies did not drill inland and offshore on millions of leased acres in their possession for over 30 years ?
Why didn't Republicans, when they controlled the House, Senate, and the White House for so many years, help oil companies drill oil, and now blaming Democrats isntead?
Fact: Future Oil drilled in America will make less than 1 % of total daily world oil output , which will have no serious impact on oil prices and it will not bring prices down.
Fact: Some of oil produced in Alaska was sold to Japan and other countries by oil companies.
Fact: to get offshore drilled oil to market ,it will take 8-9 years to reach oil pump stations.
Now McCain is fueling the oil issue by suggesting that the money we pay for our imported oil is going to the hands of terrorists, but without mentioning which countries are these so called terrorist countries and nothing to support his statements...and if so,who is responsible for this from our side ?.
In an election year, every thing is on the table for politicians to sell themselves, but such rhetorical statments can have a reverse effect on America abroad.
I am not surprised that McCain might start blaming Jimmy Carter for the escalating oil prices.
I'm surprised that McCain keeps talking about tax cuts, when we have the highest deficit on books ever.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:34 pmWe have trillions of dollars in debt, yet in an election year, McCain is promising that he will be cutting taxes big time...but what about revenues for McCain's coming wars..?
Where are the billions for McCain's planned wars supposed to come from? !!
As Amory Lovins says..."The Stone Age Didn't End because we ran out of STONES."
Friedman was wrong about Iraq, but he's Right about this.
Why aren't we drilling for Geothermal Energy? It could provide maybe a third of our electricity needs, and once the Well is Drilled...It provides Safe, carbon Free Energy virtually Forever.
Meanwhile the Congress has CUT virtually ALL funding for the research and development of Geothermal Energy!
September 7th, 2008 at 5:55 pmIs this a Reichwinger using logic....wait I am sooooo confused, their logic gene has been dropped eons ago, this is just some typo I would think.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:55 pmThe falling price of oil showes what a ruse the "drill baby
September 7th, 2008 at 6:00 pmdrill" bit is. Supply didn't just increase did it? Even if we started drilling now any supply increasewe could make could offset by a decrease of supply by OPEC. Keeping the price high. If the oil companies wanted to drill, nothing stopping them. Shara wants to drill because 75% of the revnues
go to her state.
What oil company is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to find and produce oil, then turn around and sell it to America, for way less than the market value?
September 7th, 2008 at 6:00 pmBy the time ANY of these new wells produce, we should be way the hell off oil as our energy source. As Obama said, ten years and we can do it!
September 7th, 2008 at 6:06 pmdrill, drill, drill....
exploit the hardship of others so Big Oil can drill in more places?
Bill Watenburg, phd in one of the sciences and a rightie, on KGOradio.com, Sat. Sun. 10pm - 1am pacific time made the comment last night to a caller that we WOULD see/use most of the oil here if we drilled here. Have not heard that statement anywhere and I am always shocked how this guy lies risking his credibility to protect his agenda.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:23 pmVerbalKint Says:
I’m not the least bit surprised to see the Republican base gravitate towards the most obsolete and ineffective solution to the energy problem. After all, many of these same people believe the earth is 6000 years old.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
UH, have you checked the age of the GOP leaders. I swear one at least flew on a dinosaur.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:49 pmFriedman's had quite a change from his "the free market is my god, alongside my king, George W. Bush" to his current opinion. Maybe he realises all his money (er, his wife's money) won't be worth shit if the earth melts from global warming.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:55 pmPathetic, simply pathetic. We sit here raising awareness on these little left-wing sites when Fox and the GOP BLAST out their harmful messages meant to line the pockets of big business. We're loging the election, losing the middle ground in America and losing the truth on these issues. We have no one to blame but ourselves and the weakest political party (Dems) that we have ever seen.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:10 pmThere's actually a lot of renewable energy projects going on across the states _ both red and blue _ because the states recognize that they need to forge ahead. The GOP will soon become a relic and a model for what not to think and do.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:15 pmI would be all for more domestic drilling, if laws were passed that all domestic oil had to be sold domestically only.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:20 pmI was ready to turn off the TV when I heard Friedman - after the fool he made of himself over the past 6 years - but I did listen and maybe he is not beyond redemption.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:28 pmI still don't like the guy, but I couldn't disagree with him today. Can anyone say six more months?
Six more months, and I hope we are on our way toward turning everything around with Obama/Biden and a Democratic Congress.
I told a Republican that I know that drilling will not change the dynamics of our oil dependency situation, primarily because after any domestically-produced oil enters the world oil markets (years down the road) then all the Middle East oil producers need to do is decrease their own production, keeping crude oil stockpiles on the oil market at the same level, conserving their own oil reserves while also keeping the price per barrel the same.
If we had as much reserves as the Middle East and OPEC producers have, then the situation would be different.
This is why the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was established, presumably with the idea that our salt-dome oil reserves would be shipped the short distance required to oil refineries along the Gulf Coast. But our SPR is finite, just like all of the world's oil reserves.
This is why alternative forms and sources of energy are of paramount importance...if we as a nation are going to maintain our standard of living far into the future.
By running through our own oil reserves in the 20th Century, we've left our nation vulnerable to nations with huge oil reserves in the 21st Century.
So, unless the off-shore drilling produces enough oil to dwarf the huge oil reserves of these other oil producing nations (in the Middle East and elsewhere), then our drilling off-shore (or in ANWR) in the short-term will not help us at all in the long-term.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:43 pmUnderlying the theme of 'DRILL' is 'this is the end'! The world of oil is collapsing as compared to the past drilling era. Progressives know the future, new developing solar and wind energy however the fascists hide their head in the sand oil. The Repukes are still waiting for Obama to apologize for raising gasoline prices...the nerve of Obama, insert chuckle.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:02 pmIt was weird as hell to hear the faint sound drill, drill, drill. repugs didn't get one talking point chant together. It was discombobulated from jump.
Steele is the pits. Well all of the repugs really.
and to that palin...
September 7th, 2008 at 8:03 pmAnd we need to keep reminding everyone that we are already the third leading oil PRODUCING nation. And the only reason we trail anyone is that they have reserves which are cheaper to tap.
One thing that no one mentions is that Alaska oil and/or offshore oil is about the most expensive oil there is to extract even if oil companies receive new leases and exploit them immediately. They are not going to go off on such an expensive project without a certain market and, because they are greedy leeches, public funding/subsidies. There's no way the oil industry would go it alone.
If the oil companies get new leases they will, eventually, beg for public funding. Perhaps that's the real reason the Grand Oil Party would run such a weak ticket? Is that the real purpose behind the platform? Is it all just to spread the meme that only the oil companies can save us?
That would be an awesome response to come from Obama. "Sen. Obama has been criticized by people saying Government can't solve all of peoples problems but, apparently his opponent expects that Exxon Mobile and Haliburton can do what government can't".
September 7th, 2008 at 8:06 pmI think most people would like a comprehensive plan to deal with the energy issue. Drilling, clean coal, solar, geothermal, wind, nuclear, etc.
Conservatives want to open up ANWAR and new drilling in the Gulf.
Progressives say that's not the answer, let's focus solely on clean renewables and conservation. Many people think the answer is a combination of the two.
How about this for a compromise: Let conservatives drill the Gulf and ANWAR with the stipulation that all the money be used for the implementation of the clean renewables. More gas on the market (even if it will take several years) and more money to invest in the renewables that will sustain us for the long run.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:07 pmI've got a better idea. Let's all just use less...
September 7th, 2008 at 8:08 pmI'm so happy that Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden are on our side. The dems couldn't have such imbeciles on their team.
Can you imagine the repugs defending the truth?
Me neither.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:13 pmThere are some 510,000 wells that produce oil in America. In order to increase production to wean us off foreign oil.
Those 510,000 wells produce 7.61 million barrels a day
America imports some 13.5 million of barrels a day.
We would have to drill 510,000 more wells and HOPE they produced as much as the other 510,000 wells.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:19 pmI think the drilling is seen as part of the solution and not the whole solution.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:20 pm.
R E M E M B E R:
Friedman cheerlead us into Iraq!!!
... Got credible?
.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:31 pm#35 backup Says:
You are ever so right on that backup...
... Maybe they can drill on the leases they already have... NO?
.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:35 pmXisithrus,
September 7th, 2008 at 8:37 pmWhat you're NOT taking into account is the amount of crude the US sells on the market. THAT is where part of the problem is.
What you’re NOT taking into account is the amount of crude the US sells on the market. THAT is where part of the problem is.
Im aware of the London and Enron loopholes and was focusing on US consumption.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:43 pmIsn't that something, dbadass? If a gang of us "leftists" marched on Washington shouting "CONSERVE. CONSERVE. CONSERVE!" some gang of, self-proclaimed "conservatives" would open fire on the crowd. And Katie Freaking Couric would call the victims, "anarchists".
The thought of cutting back, eliminating waste, or making efficiency the primary design requirement, doesn't even enter their minds. They are fixated on the myth, fed by those with the most to gain from the status quo, that demand for oil must increase even though recent months would suggest otherwise.
And now the "Big Three" automakers want a 50 billion dollar subsidy to produce 5,000lb tanks that do 0-60 in 5 seconds! It's just so sad that they won't see the necessity of sacrificing performance for efficiency. I don't recall the exact ratio but saving weight/hp in an engine reduces the weight of the rest of the drive-train and structure.
Then, some of the saving can be use to build stronger/safer cars that are smaller, lighter, and MUCH more fuel efficient. There's no reason a smart auto builder couldn't have a fleet of cars that would carry 2 people at 50+ mpg within a couple years. And they could do it with proven technology.
Plus, some of the prototypes for hybrids, with a small high performance generator plus batteries driving electric motors instead of transmissions, could exceed 100mpg on virtually any fuel for highway cruising. And by charging from the grid for short, slow, trips they wouldn't even start the "engine" on trips around city streets..
And the perfect technology already exists for the problem of transporting kids and their junk. Us old farts call them bicycles though it was mostly the rich kids that had them. And I'm only half joking when I say that the elimination of taxi-moms would prove a net safety advantage when weighed against having our precious babies clogging the streets with bikes and backpacks.
Of course, kids in my day were tougher and had to walk 17 miles, in waste deep snow, hounded by packs of wolves...
September 7th, 2008 at 8:51 pmAs for Friedman, I agree, for once on the way drilling is being touted.
But people also cried http://WWW.Com, http://WWW.com, http://WWW.com during the technology bubble and we see how that went.
We need to invest in alternative energy, surely, but we also should be cautious of creating another big bubble that would burst
September 7th, 2008 at 8:52 pmB-kup. Can't you see that the actual drilling isn't the issue?
The problem is that the GOP is offering reserves that were set aside for very good reasons. They are in lockstep approval and, so far, I have seen nothing to rationally support this move. Yet, so many have decided to drill here drill now before the case has even been considered by our elected government.
I'm not saying "never drill" and very few others have even implied that. My problem with the GOP party line is that they have announced their intention to allow new leases before a public discussion! By doing this they have violated the first law of negotiation. They have announced the conclusion before the question has been, officially, considered.
Then, when considers the outright lies? One is left in no mood to accept the judgment of the people who have vocally advocated this approach. And they sure as Hell can't justify pumping more oil without upgrading refineries and other infrastructure to save more through modern refinery design.
Alas, we are stuck with an oil industry who's official spokespeople make asinine remarks suggesting that it doesn't make sense to build new, efficient, refineries because "high prices make refining more expensive and it doesn't make good sense to upgrade refineries when prices seem inclined to remain high".
Are they effing kidding? They are dealing with a commodity which is finite in supply and they want us to believe that prices are too high to allow investment in cutting waste? And they try to pass this tripe past us when the oil industry has cleared record profits for three consecutive years?
September 7th, 2008 at 9:08 pmOil has dropped in price per bbl lately. That is a function of price, supply and demand. Very simple.
Yes, we should drill in every area that oil is to be had.
Anyone here liking the resurgence of Russia under Pooty-Poot? It is high oil prices that have made it possible.
Anyone here think it is in Pooty-Poots interest to not see Iran go Nuclear? While he lines his coffers from their oil revenus selling them weapons?
He is playing the West like a Harp from Hell. Decacades from now, Russian historians will hail him as Vlad the Great, mark my words.
Wind, Solar, Geothermal - all great. All not feasible in the immediate. Oil, Nukes, Clean Coal - that is what is making your computer run right now. We need all of the above.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:16 pmI hear ya pete. Back when I was a kid, we all lived at the bottom of a septic tank. Happy though we were poor...
September 7th, 2008 at 9:19 pmpete Says:
I’m not saying “never drill” and very few others have even implied that. My problem with the GOP party line is that they have announced their intention to allow new leases before a public discussion! By doing this they have violated the first law of negotiation. They have announced the conclusion before the question has been, officially, considered.
Pete, my McFriend, you deep conservative, you...
The ELECTION
September 7th, 2008 at 9:21 pmAw crap...damned computer.
THE ELECTION ( I meant to say ) is the discussion you want. The R's annoncing their intentions will either gather support or it will not. This election is the public discussion and negotiation you call for - let the voters decide.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:23 pmpete. I personally don't want to drill. My thinking is that those oil reserves can stay in the ground as a real reserve if emergency world oil shortages ever do occur. We would be glad that we have them then.
But, to get to energy independence, (through conservation and alternative clean renewables) I think you need to get conservatives on board.
Here's Palin from a few days ago:
Although I think you're right about drilling (and I also don't want to drill, for a different reason), I think that the American people line up with Palin on the issue.
I think an Obama victory in November is likely, but I wouldn't take it for granted:
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx
I just think that if Obama compromised and adopted a more comprehensive plan that included drilling, clean coal and nuclear - he could woo those who think like Palin on energy and increase his odds for success in November.
I believe the best chances for focus on clean renewables, will be with an Obama victory. I think that will be more assured if he compromises on drilling.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:30 pmWingers support more drilling SOLELY because "the liburls" oppose it.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:30 pmGettin' close to fighten' words there Keltoi. "Conservative" lost it's, once respectable, meaning about the time Ronnie Raygun humped Fallwell's leg on national TV. If not earlier LOL!
But seriously, if Congress gives away the right to say "NO!" before, as so many like to say, "certain conditions are met" then the oil industry will open the bidding with 100% public funding, no taxes, and keeping 100% of the gross. Then, our idiotic politicians, from both sides of the aisle, can make a pretense of "saying no to big oil".
One of the first rules of horse trading is that you tell the buyer that you won't sell the horse at any price. Then let them start the begging and insist on cash. One does not, as our idiotic legislators are wont to do, walk into the saloon, yell "horse for sale", take the first bid, and then trust the local robber baron to leave the payment at the Western Union in Tombstone on some day after the 1st of the month.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:39 pmWind, Solar, Geothermal - all great. All not feasible in the immediate. Oil, Nukes, Clean Coal - that is what is making your computer run right now.
And we might as well incorperate pixie dust, and moonbeams as well, since we're referencing imaginary energy sources like the fictional clean coal.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:41 pmFact of matter re: drilling in deep water. Ultra Deep Water Drillships are made by three Korean Companies. Samsung Heavy Industries, Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering and Hyundai Heavy Industries. They have gotten all the current crop of orders for these type of ships which now cost over 500 million. If you were to order now you can expect delivery in 2017.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:46 pmOil, Nukes, Clean Coal - that is what is making your computer run right now. We need all of the above.
I live the Pacific Northwest, our energy comes largely from Hydropower and nuclear.
September 7th, 2008 at 9:48 pmDrilling should be stopped. Whatever is in the ground in U.S. soil should be considered "Strategic Reserve." We know where it is, it ain't going anywhere. There is no reason to tap it and pump it into the "strategic reserve in salt mines in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Petroleum_Reserve
LEAVE IT IN THE GROUND
September 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pmmongoose Says:
Fact of matter re: drilling in deep water. Ultra Deep Water Drillships are made by three Korean Companies. Samsung Heavy Industries, Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering and Hyundai Heavy Industries. They have gotten all the current crop of orders for these type of ships which now cost over 500 million. If you were to order now you can expect delivery in 2017.
Which proves that the only thing this rush to drill is about is leasing our children's and grand children's future use of these lands, nothing more, nothing less. The oilgarchy want to have the rights to the land, irrespective of their intent to actually tap it.
Use the 56,000,000 acres within the 10's of thousands of leases already signed, sealed and delivered.
"USE IT, OR LOOSE IT"
September 7th, 2008 at 10:13 pmThat's the problem b-kup. Obama hasn't said that he would veto any specific energy plan or source, he has moved towards the center on energy but, his opponents still keep lying through their teeth and saying he will do "nothing at all".
I can't stand prospective leaders who are so blatantly dishonest. And I especially can't stand apologists who then spread and expand on the falsehood until you end up with a foamy-mouthed gang who are convinced that Obama is going to shut down domestic oil production and turn off their lights.
Everything I have learned about the Jebus/Palin/McSpin ticket suggests that they can't tell a fact from a fantasy. Palin, in particular, might as well "speak in tongues" when it comes to solid facts. In fairness, she may not Believe she lies at all. But, she does lie with incredible regularity and displays a hostile attitude to anyone who doesn't accept her word as Gospel with equal regularity.
As for my reason for not drilling, I just don't think it's wise to sell something you don't desperately need to sell when it's a buyers market. In this case, one waits until the oil industry comes begging for those leases.
As for conservation. It will never happen as long as our candidates and pundits continue to ridicule things like efficient lighting, tire inflation, and slower driving. And really promising technologies are at hand.
From on sight generating turbines, generators and high-tech sails on supertankers (Some have theorized that a combination of retractable, computer controlled, sails and wind generators on merchant ships could save as much as 30% on Worldwide shipping fuel consumption. Exciting stuff!), subsidized rooftop solar, and many existing technologies, to more theoretical stuff; we have to do it all and we do not need to give away the baby in a panic.
And I defy any of the lying scum, or their apologists, who can find a single instance where Sen. Obama has said "I would rather do nothing, than drill" or anything remotely close to that. It's hard to say whether McSpin and Palin are dishonest morally or intellectually and to what degree. But neither of them say much that passes a simple fact check.
To be truthful. They are both disqualified, many times over, before I even need to consider their political affiliations. And it's absurd little statements like "our opponent would rather do nothing" that show just how disqualified they are.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:15 pmHere's some disturbing news: USA Today's poll conducted 9/5 - 9/7 has McCain leading 55% to Obama's 45%.
Now is the time to make some calls, knock on some doors, talk to your family, friends, neighbors, coworkers, people in line at the store, etc. Register someone. Write letters to the editor. Call your local news stations if coverage contains false information presented as fact. Donate money if you can.
This is our time and our election. I refuse to lose this one. There is way too much at stake.
PEACE
September 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pmbackup,
Try finding out about Palin before you think you understand what she stands for.
ABOUT SARAH PALIN
I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.
She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a 'babe'.
It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.
She is 'pro-life'. She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.
She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.
She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just 'puts things out there' and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit. Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.
Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.
She's smart.
Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.
During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign.
Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a 'fiscal conservative'. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.
The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.
While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.
These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.
As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state. In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.
She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.
While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.
Sarah complained about the 'old boy's club' when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of 'old boys'. Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).
As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he 'intimidated' her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired,pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.
She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.
Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.
When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the 'old boys' club' when she dramatically quit, exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).
As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the 'bridge to nowhere' after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.
As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as 'anti-pork'.
She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal
conservative.
Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her 'Sarah Barracuda' because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team.
When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as 'AGIA' that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.
Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned 'as a private citizen' against a state initiaitive that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar bears as threatened species.
McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President. There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.
However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.
CLAIM VS FACT
- 'Hockey mom': true for a few years
- 'PTA mom': true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since
- 'NRA supporter': absolutely true
- social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
- pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.
- 'Pro-life': mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation
- 'Experienced': Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.
- political maverick: not at all
- gutsy: absolutely!
- open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.
- has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
-'a Greenie': no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
- fiscal conservative: not by my definition!- pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.
- pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents
- pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla's history.- pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.
WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.
Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that 'Bad things happen when good people stay silent'. Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.
Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that's life.
Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.
Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.
CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of
Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.
You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my 'about 5,000', up to 9,000. The day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.
Anne Kilkenny
September 7th, 2008 at 10:18 pmannekilkenny@hotmail.com
August 31, 2008
Perhaps we should counter the "Drill Drill Drill" BS with statements such as "Wind Wind Wind POWER" and "Sun Sun Solar Power".
It would be a good idea if communities, towns and such would band together and purchase solar panels and wind turbines to furnish their own power. I suggested it at my HomeOwner's Association, but alas no response. BUT I would not be surprised if, in a couple of months, someone else suggests it, and who knows? it'll be voted on, maybe tried. "New" ideas take awhile to percolate into many brains.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:22 pmFriedman does seem to be a Class A Dork, but it's important to get the truth, the message out there. Don't fret about who does it or why. A good action done for a selfish reason is still a good action.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:24 pmElection or no, Keltoi, is it not disturbing that elected officials, including many who are not facing an election, are vocally endorsing a plan before conditions are negotiated?
And. Will someone who got elected on "drill here drill now" be able to take back that support when Exxon wants the Seebees to build them an Arctic port at taxpayer expense?
Heck! What if the Worst President EVER sneaks through a signing statement that makes oil spills "no fault"? Some have floated the idea (pun partially intended)that the government should cover the cost of cleaning up oil spills. No questions asked. And it sure ain't "tree-hugging lefty libruls" who are proposing such an asinine policy because it would mean no spill would be assured of being cleaned up.
BTW. If there were particular unease about oil supplies, the chaos in Ossetia and the string of hurricanes would have driven oil to $200.00 a barrel. I always hope for the best but, it would be interesting to see what happens if we do see significant damage to oil assets.
A legitimate rise in price might, strangely, help the Dems. Although it's a subject for an entirely different thread, I will finish by saying that hurricane damage could prevent any efforts to fudge prices a bit lower for the election. I'm not implying a plot, yet, but $3.00 per gallon gas would make the Jebus/Palin/McSpin message of a strong economy more plausible.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:40 pmphred42 Says:
Odd hearing this from Friedman
Is he attempting to save his reputation after promoting his insane Free Market crap for years?
__________
Don't forget... he was also a BIG cheerleader for BotchCo's bloody nightmare in Iraq...
September 7th, 2008 at 10:57 pmbackup Says:
I think the drilling is seen as part of the solution and not the whole solution.
____________
Here w/ the dishonest meme again...
Wha the? Epaulets on a smoking jacket?
Somebody get a picture of this, before he realizes how ridiculous he looks...
September 7th, 2008 at 11:00 pmbackup Says:
But, to get to energy independence, (through conservation and alternative clean renewables) I think you need to get conservatives on board.
____________
Oh puke... we've had "conservatives" on board for the last 8 years and the place is a wreck... Jeebus... you NEVER stop trying.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:02 pmAlecto, please stop posting the whole damn letter. Links are good.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:03 pmSorry,
September 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pmMia culpa.
I had no link, it was sent in email, all text. I will search for the opig.
Ok, it took a matter of 3 seconds to find it.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:09 pmhttp://www.andrys.com/palin-kilkenny.html
Alecto. It was long, but I read every word. I appreciate you went to the effort. That kind of first hand knowledge means more to me. Zooey's right about the link, but sometimes people don't bother opening links.
Thanks for the info. It's an understatement to say that it is the most complete that I've seen.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:13 pmbackup Says:
I think the drilling is seen as part of the solution and not the whole solution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am glad that is what YOU think but trust me there are plenty of wingnuts that think it IS the answer and who say that we have plenty of oil domestically if she would just drill.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:13 pmThanks, Alecto. :)
September 7th, 2008 at 11:14 pmSo, what's the harm with the compromise. Give in to conservatives that want to drill with the stipulation that there will be a concurrent effort in renewables. (And I suggest tax the drilling to pay for the efforts in renewables).
I think the jeopardy is in letting conservatives have the issue. The average American may not get that it'll take 10 years to see the oil. Or that, energy wise, it's a drop in the bucket.
And conservatives have been successful portraying the drilling of ANWR and the Gulf as not ecologically harmful.
If Obama would open up to the idea that we could include conservative ideas about drilling, coal and nuclear - while we increase our efforts in solar, wind and conservation, he could coop what is a winning conservative idea and keep those concerned about energy from migrating.
He could alienate some environmentalists. But, I think he's got more to lose, by appearing to be hamstrung into inaction. (Again, that's appearance - appearance that is sadly very important).
September 7th, 2008 at 11:25 pmWillowOrchid.
One of the best proposals I have heard for rooftop solar was to start with a mandate to put a panel on every, practical, new roof. It's cheaper to build systems in from scratch. Split the costs between power companies, government and end users. If the "free" power is used by the end user to offset consumption, the end user would pay a larger share up front. If "the grid" consumes the bulk of the "free" power, the power company pays more. Much the same plan is working for both wind and solar in many places.
It will be expensive but costs can be shared and the investment potential is unguessable. Fierce competition would have add on units available, for about the cost of an awning or layer of shingles, within a, probably, very few years. It could get as cheap as a decent paint job for do it yourselfers.
If it's done right? The office roof pays for lighting, the empty houses of your employees produce for computers and stuff, the grid covers the rest. Then cleaner, less centralized, generation comes in.
"Clean coal" is a myth. But, smarter coal is a valid part of the process of eliminating it at a future date. Modern, local, on-demand, power generation is more efficient with any portable fuel source. Plus, smaller operations can have their emissions "scrubbed" or trapped more easily. And, in smaller operations, catalytic systems, similar in concept to cars, become more efficient. Bottom line is that any emissions avoided are a gain.
And multi-fuel plants could, hopefully, eliminate coal altogether. A lot of coal could be saved by aggressive investment in natural gas production and transport infrastructure. We have lots of underutilized gas (much of it is burned off or pumped back in to pressurize oil wells) and, while it's far from perfect, it can be burned much more cleanly than coal.
And, of course, the best response to emissions is, just like the answer for supply and demand, to spend whatever can be responsibly invested in higher efficiency and waste reduction.
Heck! I once heard an estimate of how much carbon could be kept in our gas tanks by outlawing drive-through service.
Eliminating all the idling would be like eliminating every car in a city the size of San Diego from the national carbon footprint. Besides which, if one is going to consume 4.7 billion calories? One might as well park and walk a dozen feet or so, LOL!
September 7th, 2008 at 11:26 pmtest
September 7th, 2008 at 11:29 pmwhat does the 'close tags' button do?
September 7th, 2008 at 11:30 pmIt closes any tags you might have open, such as italics or bold.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:34 pmpete. you post great ideas. But how much will those ideas mean if McCain/Palin are able to convince the average American that drilling is a significant part of the equation to free us from foreign oil.
McCain/Palin talk about renewables, but will they get as much attention as they would in the party of Gore (in an Obama administration).
Standing on the principle of not drilling, may be the only issue that I think places Obama in jeopardy.
McCain co-oped the 'Change' message. Obama could co-op McCain's more popular energy stands (drilling/nuclear).
Great ideas aren't worth much, if they have to be shelved for another 4 years.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:39 pmthank you, Zooey.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:40 pmbackup Says:
So, what’s the harm with the compromise. Give in to conservatives...
__________
That's you only real reason for coming here, isn't it? Just like that ridiculous "McCain really is a moderate" routine from yesterday.
__________
The average American may not get that it’ll take 10 years to see the oil...
__________
Don't you really mean, "The average STUPID American"??? So, we're supposed to all play down to the stupid ones?
__________
And conservatives have been successful portraying the drilling of ANWR and the Gulf as not ecologically harmful.
__________
Oh, the hell they have... John bOner? James "The Earth Is Flat" Imhofe? Again, your only suggestion is "give in to the stupid people"...
We've tried compromising w/ dishonest idiots like you for the last eight years, and look at where it's gotten us.
GO AWAY, troll.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:42 pmbackup Says:
Obama could co-op McCain’s more popular energy stands (drilling/nuclear).
__________
Oh... DOUBLE puke... just because you have the gall to say it, it doesn't make it true. Just bound and determined to shill this Shi'ite for the GOOP, aren't you?
Do you have any idea how ridiculous the epaulets look on a smoking jacket?
September 7th, 2008 at 11:43 pmbackup sez:
Give in to conservatives...
You're kidding, right? Eight f ucking years is enough giving in! Look at where this country is, Captain.
Just look at it...
September 7th, 2008 at 11:48 pmRepublic. Imagine if you're with a group of people that are planning a picnic. I come into the room and mention that it looks like it could rain. Would you automatically get pissed at me for bringing it up or would you take a look outside?
You may not be in the mood to compromise. I get it. But I don't think the American people are as disenchanted with the conservatives as you believe they are:
All I'm saying: maybe bring an umbrella, maybe plan something indoors. At least take a harder look at the weather.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:51 pmStill don't get it b-kup?
Here's the deal. My problem with "Give in to conservatives that want to drill with the stipulation that there will be a concurrent effort in renewables" is?
They are not proposing those stipulations or the ones that worry me. They haven't said they even intend to use the leases in this freaking century. They don't have the resources to do it within years of the available negotiation time. They have not assured the public that the oil industry will cover the up-front costs. They have not assured the public that ANY environmental considerations will be made under current laws, much less what might make sense when they can actually begin theses leases...
Seriously. Signing leases for projects that can't begin for years after the lease is negotiated is like paying for a used car, allowing the original owner to drive it for five years and expecting to get it in the same condition as when you "bought" it.
If the oil industry wants to get serious? Order the hardware and give us an estimate of when production will hit the point where they are committed. Let us say the "point of no return" when they are asked for earnest money is 5 years.
That gives us an entire administration to haggle the deal. I have seen nothing from Obama to suggest that he would be an easy sell but, I don't think he would stop a good plan. On the other hand, Flippy McSpin has virtually assured he would sign on to any plan, no matter how bad. And I certainly don't trust this administration or Congress to negotiate a deal as lame ducks. The whole damn lot of them would end up with own, personal, oil rigs.
Try as I might, I can't think of a single sane, or logical, reason why anyone would want the current generation in Washington to negotiate anything with anyone. And that has nothing to do with politics. I'm even willing to chance a McSpin administration with a new Congress/Senate rather than Bushco et al. I don't care which side of the aisle you're on, how could anyone want these (bleeps) to make more "deciderings"? I wouldn't want them to negotiate for a glass of water on my behalf.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:52 pmpete. I read your post. But I've got to go to bed.
Good nite, everybody.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:00 amThe problem with Captain backup is that he just "believes" the shit people tell him.
Get a clue.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:03 ambackup Says:
Republic. Imagine if you’re with a group of people that are planning a picnic.
___________
Oh, triple puke... you're not here to "start a dialogue" or "warn us". You're here to "distort the dialogue" and "plant suggestive memes". You're dishonest, manipulative, sneaky and condescending as hell.
"McCain is a moderate" is the perfect example... if one accepts this POS w/out questioning it, then McInsane's lunatic rantings become more acceptable... hey, wanna here Johnny's latest rape joke?
Perhaps we all need to move closer to Johnny's stance on the issues if we really wanna be "good moderates", huh, backdoor? And if we don't, we're what, the marginalized "angry far left"??? Quadruple puke.
Hey... let's all debate Obama V Palin... meaningless, but sure sounds good huh?
ANOTHER false position from the twit in the smoking jacket.
And what do we have tonight?
"Give in to conservatives..."
"McCain’s more popular energy stands"... no need or reason to question or debate this statement, our savior "backdoor" has come to enlighten us all...
"conservatives have been successful..." At what, destroying the country?
Puke puke, puke, and puke again...
September 8th, 2008 at 12:10 amYou're just SOOOOOOOOOOOOO obvious, you snotty, high-handed, condescending twit.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:12 amThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
You’re just SOOOOOOOOOOOOO obvious, you snotty, high-handed, condescending twit.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Bingo!
September 8th, 2008 at 12:21 amFor the 2nd time in my life, I am agreeing 100% with Mr. Friedman.
Go figure.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:22 amIn plain simple language, the Jebus/Palin/Mcspin camp is saying "drill here drill now". That implies they give their proxies to the current administration and will endorse ANY deal if they are elected. That's stupid regardless of the arguments.
And, once again, I defy anyone to provide a quote which suggests Obama would put "drilling on the shelf for four years". He's stated often and loudly, and included in his platform, an openness to any energy proposals that make good sense.
And he specifically mentioned nuclear and more drilling as being things that, while he doesn't consider them front runners, are open to negotiation. But, because he's a thoughtful, cautious, and personally moderate (politically too compared to what Reichwhiners would have one believe.) man, he doesn't commit to any deal he hasn't even seen an outline for.
Do you guys bother to pay any attention to what he is saying? Is the American so accustomed to Reckless radicals, from many camps, that we can't even understand simple concepts like:
Decision before consideration is colossal stupidity?
Don't you understand that it's up to these people to make sound decisions? Don't you understand that they must be truthful when explaining these conclusions? Don't you comprehend that they are lying to sell a plan that has no limits? Don't you realize that they are bound, above all, to tell us the truth? Period?
And arguing that they have this blind support for drilling because it's "what the people want" makes me so effing mad I'm tempted to kick my cat! They are selling a bogus product under false pretense!! And they haven't been effing elected!!!
It is surreal that anyone could not see it. Perhaps they do and don't care?
September 8th, 2008 at 12:25 amZooey Says:
Bingo!
___________
Thank youuuuu... thank you verrry much!
September 8th, 2008 at 12:25 ampete Says:
Do you guys bother to pay any attention to what he is saying?
__________
Of course not, pete. The righties in this country won't be satisfied w/ anything less than "total victory", even though thy have no meaningful idea what it means. The words alone give them such throbbing chubbies, they're simply besides themselves w/ the mere thought.
What did that twit w/ McStain's campaign say the other day? Something to the effect, "Whatever will help us win..." Sweet jeebus, they think this is just a game and that winning is all that matters.
Meanwhile... Pakistan's military has publically stated they reserve the right to retaliate over Botch's strikes in thir territory latelast week, and now Venezuela is planning joint naval maneuvers w/ Russia this fall.
Ooooooooh, goodie! More peace dividends compliments of BotchCo.
And what does Backdoor have to share w/ us?
"Give in to conservatives..." Yessssss, I know, backdoor, by even repeating iti n print, I'm helping reinforce your clever little meme...
Gosh, you're SOOOOOOOOO F-in' slick...
None of us dumb lib'ruls kin figger you out.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:34 am...1,718. 1,719...
Boy it's hard to remain patient when trying to debunk BS, from a BS'er with decent manners. But, how many ways must we prove that McSpin is a pandering idiot, Palin is just plain dangerous, and sane people believe this because they prove it with every word and deed?
I feel like bathing in bleach after everything I read about either one of the slimy (bleeps). And the sheeple give them a pass because he's a POW and she's a "chaste Christian mom". Puke indeed.
But the final insult is when they defend their lying and accept them working for secret designs. They know what kind of jackals they support. The aspiring "Royal Couple" could serve roast infants on the Capital Mall and the Believers wouldn't even let it register.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:42 amYa got that right TRoS. They can eff up a whole lot of stuff that no one can fix very soon even if there is the hoped for swing in November. And I don't even want to think about what they can do if Obama wins and the Dems get 60 seats. Chimpy himself is nuts enough to nuke Philly because they knocked the Boys out of the playoffs.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:50 ampete Says:
Chimpy himself is nuts enough to nuke Philly because they knocked the Boys out of the playoffs.
___________
I find it odd that BiggusDickus hasn't come out publicly and endorsed his potential VEEP replacement yet... but then, he is busy, stirring up support for WW III in Central Asia, huh?
September 8th, 2008 at 1:04 amThey are, indeed, a frightening and dangerous bunch. But, I'll manage to sleep anyway.
G'night good people.
September 8th, 2008 at 1:08 amYou too trolls.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Ouch
September 8th, 2008 at 7:58 amMcCain vows to have Democrats in Cabinet
McCain vows to have Democrats in Cabinet
http://ccoaler.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccain-vows-to-have-democrats-in.html
I guess Bush didnt leave too much when it comes to persons. Well, McCain is of course Bushs prince, but this doesnt count in the close sense, because McCain ran against Bush in 2000. So which people did Bush build up in his 8 years of presidency? Virtually noone. We got Kenneth Mehlman and the other gay dude who become famous for molesting in toilet zones, I guess his name is Larry Craig. Any other famous governors/senators? Arnold Schwarzenegger I guess. But this is no real case of competence also. I guess hes a bodybuilder from Austria. So... McCain picked Palin, the unknown govenor from Alaska. And? Another competence debacle. McCain doesnt hold too many cards on hand when it comes to persons. He got an unpopular Rice for her Israel/Palestine disaster, an unpopular Powell for non existing Iraqi bio-labs in front of the UN. Sure, McCain can help if the Iranians should nuke Iraq, but the US soldiers wholl die there wouldnt be there in the first place without him. Rumsfeld was verbally "as efficient as Bush" and gates is a lame duck. McCain is in fact the only 1 right now who has a competence plus in comparison to Obama. And forget especially about these other like Huckabee. There arent too many Republican senators who are insiders at current. McCain holding out for a democratic hand two months ahead of the election is clear proof that Bush didnt leave much more than ruins concerning the GOP. This doesnt make McCain more electable. U know, its the same party.hehe.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:27 amBLOOD FOR OIL!..BLOOD FOR OIL!..BLOOD FOR OIL!..in Iraq blood for oil...in Iran blood for oil...in Georgia blood for oil pipeline...in Venezuela blood for oil. Now just who doesn't get it??
September 8th, 2008 at 8:36 amGood news on 2 fronts today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=1&ref=business&oref=slogin
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-07-poll_N.htm
September 8th, 2008 at 8:42 amI don't think I ever suggesting that drilling was a significant way to address the energy problem. (I actually said that I believe the oil should stay in the ground to be a real reserve in the event of a global oil shortage). It's up the thread, check it out.
Although I don't believe that drilling should be the focus, I'm suggesting that Obama should co-op the idea to get those people that do see drilling as important (a majority of the American people) from migrating to McCain.
If Obama and Democrats are in a strong enough position, they can disregard compromise and drive whatever agenda they want. If they are that strong. But, I've posted it a couple of times. McCain is leading Obama in the polls. That doesn't sound like it's a strong enough position to totally disregard the opposition.
Although I don't support drilling, I can see that it is an issue that Obama may want to adopt, so that he can better his chances of enacting the rest of his progressive agenda.
Of course, if progressives are unwilling to compromise, complaining through another 4 years is always an option.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:32 amGood point. Now the Obama campaign just needs to pick it up and run with it.
September 8th, 2008 at 2:17 pm