U.S. Elections 2008: General Elections -- Analysis and Commentary

[Tribesman]

I never got a job from a poor man, as I say.

Dave you worked for the government , you cannot get a poorer employer than one that is $9,685,027,356,398 in debt .

[KukriKhan]

Kukri, we are going to have to get that Diebold engineer back in.

Just in case he asks, you guys aren't Floridian Democrats, by any chance?

I thought I could swap out polls (delete the old one, put up a new one) but I was wrong; the "ghost" of the old one remains, only allowing those who didn't vote in the previous one to vote. I'll see if our resident tech genius TosaInu can assist.

Dave you worked for the government , you cannot get a poorer employer than one that is $9,685,027,356,398 in debt

I have to admit: I never thought of it that way. LoL.

To Lemur, who asked for it, and DDave, SwedishFish and others who responded: THANK YOU. As a reader, I'm much more interested in what YOU think life will be like in January 2009 and onwards, after McCain or Obama is elected, than in what the "experts" think - I can get that on any cable news channel.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Dave you worked for the government , you cannot get a poorer employer than one that is $9,685,027,356,398 in debt .

Love that rapier sharp wit. As a gov'mint employee I really appreciate my employers' management skills and, more importantly, his huge line of credit.

Now, as to the future, I believe we give one man too much credit for the ebb & flow, good & bad of our lives. There are quite a few more people and events involved in this than just the President. My life has "fluctuated" between good and bad ever since I can remember. It will continue to do so despite who is elected the Grand Poobah.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You mean the payout would be far in the future and we wouldn't get instant gratification? Well we'd better just completely forget about it, because everyone knows planning for the future is stupid and lame.

CR

Ahaha! Planning for the future he says. Fossil fuels, the way of the future!

[Crazed Rabbit]

We'll still be suing fossil fuels in the future. We're still using coal now, and may well continue to use new, cleaner coal plants.

So heck ya, it is planning for the future. We need energy in the future, and fossil fuels are very good at that.

Oh, wait, since we can't rely nearly 100% on fossil fuels we shouldn't think about them at all! An economy with several balanced sources of energy?! Heresy!

CR

[Banquo's Ghost]

I found this a thoughtful opinion piece, which helped me reflect on some of the inchoate anxieties I have been experiencing as an observer of the Democrat party's recent form in regard to Governor Palin. I'd be interested to know if it strikes a chord in any of our US patrons.

Warning: Those prone to hyper-reactive frothing need to understand this article contains ironic statements.

The Palin nomination could still misfire for Mr McCain, but the liberal reaction has made it a huge success. To avoid endlessly repeating this mistake, Democrats need to learn respect.

It will be hard. They will have to develop regard for the values much of the country expresses when it votes Republican. Religion. Unembarrassed flag-waving patriotism. Freedom to succeed or fail through one's own efforts. Refusal to be pitied, bossed around or talked down to. And all those other laughable redneck notions that made the United States what it is.

[m52nickerson]

We'll still be suing fossil fuels in the future. We're still using coal now, and may well continue to use new, cleaner coal plants.

So heck ya, it is planning for the future. We need energy in the future, and fossil fuels are very good at that.

Oh, wait, since we can't rely nearly 100% on fossil fuels we shouldn't think about them at all! An economy with several balanced sources of energy?! Heresy!

CR

Fossil fuels are non-renewable. It would be far better to put effort and resources into energy sources that will be their well into the future.

[KukriKhan]

Fossil fuels are non-renewable. It would be far better to put effort and resources into energy sources that will be their well into the future.

Point well-taken. But, can we not multi-task, given the vast resources and smart people we have? Can we not develop wind and solar and geo-thermal and hydrogen and bio-fuel and safe nuke, AND suck up some of our own oil and coal, instead of relying so heavily on imports? Why does it have to be either-or? Why can't it be either-and?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Point well-taken. But, can we not multi-task, given the vast resources and smart people we have? Can we not develop wind and solar and geo-thermal and hydrogen and bio-fuel and safe nuke, AND suck up some of our own oil and coal, instead of relying so heavily on imports? Why does it have to be either-or? Why can't it be either-and?

The oil companies already have leases. They can just use those.

[KarlXII]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4

[KukriKhan]

The oil companies already have leases. They can just use those.

Kuulness. So, what's the hold-up?

[m52nickerson]

Point well-taken. But, can we not multi-task, given the vast resources and smart people we have? Can we not develop wind and solar and geo-thermal and hydrogen and bio-fuel and safe nuke, AND suck up some of our own oil and coal, instead of relying so heavily on imports? Why does it have to be either-or? Why can't it be either-and?

Yes we can, but I think the vast majority of federal moneys have to go to advancement of renewable sources and nuclear.

As far as drilling, I think using our own natural gas as a bridge for other techs makes more sense.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Fossil fuels are non-renewable. It would be far better to put effort and resources into energy sources that will be their well into the future.

We don't have to put any of our resources towards that. Just let the oil companies do it.

The oil companies already have leases. They can just use those.

Mmm, no, they can't. They most certainly cannot not "just use those [leases]". Simply leasing the land in no way ensures they can even explore for oil in that land. Clearing that large hurdle in no way is an assurance that there will be significant oil in those lands. Finding significant oil is no guarantee they can get permission to develop the field.

Why? Because of the government. The government is the one at fault here, as is so often the case, because of the very onerous restrictions they put on oil companies.

Here's two examples of the government being forced to pay back lease payments to companies after the government broke the lease contract ( Over one billion dollars in total rewards.) :

Number one

n 1981, Mobil Oil Exploration and Producing Southeast, Inc. and Marathon Oil company paid $158 million in non-refundable "bonus" payments to the U.S. in exchange for 10-year renewable lease contracts. The U.S. promised the companies that they could explore for oil off the North Carolina coast and develop any oil that they found, provided they applied for and were granted permission according to various statutes and regulations. The contracts were conditioned on the companies receiving permission from the federal government and North Carolina subject to the provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act1 (OSCLA) and the Coastal Zone Management Act2 (CZMA).


In order to apply for permission, the oil companies must complete a lengthy and complicated four step approval procedure. First, the company must submit a Plan of Exploration to the Department of the Interior. If the plan warrants approval, Interior must grant its approval within 30 days of the submission of the proposed plan. Second, the company must obtain an exploratory well drilling permit under the CZMA. To obtain this permit, the company's plan must be consistent with the North Carolina's coastal zone management program. If the state objects to the plan, certification fails unless the Secretary of Commerce overrides the state's objection. Third, if waste discharge is an issue, the company must obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit from the Environmental Protection Agency, which is also dependent on the approval of North Carolina. Fourth, if exploration is successful, the company must gain approval of the Department of Interior by way of a Development and Production Plan that describes the proposed drilling and the environmental safeguards the oil company proposes to implement.

The issues in this case involve the first two steps of this process: the Exploration Plan and the CZMA consistency requirement for North Carolina. In 1981, the companies entered into the contracts with the U.S. government and paid $158 million dollars for the privilege of exploring for oil. In September of 1989, the companies submitted an initial draft of their Exploration Plans to the Interior Department and North Carolina. Ten months later, after an intense review of the companies' plans, Interior made a report concluding that the proposed exploration would not "significantly affect" the marine or the human environment. In August of 1990, the companies submitted their final Exploration Plans and the CZMA consistency certification.

That's nine years after they paid for the lease that they were able to submit a final plan for exploration.

Number two

The case points to the difficulties US oil and gas companies have developing oil and gas resources in the US.

Even when acreage is legally open to production, restrictive regulations about how properties can be developed have made it impossible for companies to follow through.

That's why companies don't develop it. All those thrice-cursed morons and cretins in power place amazingly onerous regulations on energy production and get away with it because of rubes who don't demand full accountability. We as a nation allow this massive stupidity to go on, as though it's somehow good to not use our resources, because we don't demand an end to it.

CR

[Tribesman]

Why? Because of the government. The government is the one at fault here, as is so often the case, because of the very onerous restrictions they put on oil companies.

Too right , the government should ease off on the oil companies and let them operate like they do in Nigeria (or Ireland).
I find it funny that you are praising the oil companies getting your tax money in a law suit against the federal government when the companies wouldn't have been able to use the leases anyway because they didn't meet the State in questions legislative requirements .
All this crazy regulation eh , always changing it so they are .
Why can't they just let the companies do what they want ? After all oil is important , all these silly regulations about impact assesment and enviromental considerations .....bunch of limp wristed liberal hippy moaning thats all that is .
I mean look at Louisiana , who cares if a few fishes and birds get a bit disrupted by the removal of the reed beds and dregding the mud flats . Its not like its really important to people is it , its people that are important and money of course and property not a pile of ooze and some scrawny vegetation , its not like that ooze serves any use for people does it .
Well unless you do something crazy like link what them shallows do when there is a sort of big storm and what amount of money and people it costs when them mud flats ain't there to do what they do anymore .

[CountArach]

The reason Obama can't lose

Senator Barack Obama raised $66 million in the month of August, making it his best month ever and the best in American political history, an aide said Sunday morning.

Obama is releasing that number after suggestions that his fundraising was failing to meet expectations. It puts him on pace to substantially outspend John McCain in the last two months of the race, in which McCain will be limited to spending the $84 million supplied by the Treasury under public financing rules.

The Republican National Committee's cash advantage on the Democratic National Committee, however, in combination with swelling outside spending, however, will likely allow McCain to level the playing field, though the fact that Obama has raised the money himself, in small chunks, gives him direct control over how its spend, and fewer concerns about technical limits on spending.

An Obama aide said the campaign added 500,000 new donors to its rolls in August. The new figure -- shattering his previous record of $55 million -- also demonstrates how the increasingly heated, nasty race has energized Obama's fundraising, and raises expectations that he will raise that much or more in the next two months.

[Ronin]

The last 2 weeks captured on comic...

[seireikhaan]

[Lemur]

Once again, NRO comes trough with a dose of reality.

McCain's campaign is chock-full of phony contradictions; how is he supposed to bring "safe change" since this year he has essentially promised to reverse all the anti-Bush policies that made him a "maverick" in the first place? He has just squandered the single best reason for voting for him by choosing an almost totally inexperienced "celebrity" as his running mate. Foreign policy excepted, can you tell me what McCain's governing philosophy is? He has changed positions on numerous occasions times during the past ten years, going from being one of the most centrist GOP senators to one of the most conservative ones. Or is it all merely a Romney-esque cynical ploy to fool conservatives to vote for him, since he will anyway have to work with Reid/Pelosi to get anything done...

Who is more trustworthy: the young unapologetic liberal who promises real change or the old guy who is running against reality?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Nice to see you still know how to build a legion of strawmen, tribesy.

And Lemur, so one Finnish guy said that - so what? You could find a million different opinions from random people. Should I post one of some democratic guy who doesn't back Obama and act as though it's some great insight?

CR

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I didn't vote for Domestic Policy - actually, I didn't even vote in this poll at all. What's going on?

[Banquo's Ghost]

I didn't vote for Domestic Policy - actually, I didn't even vote in this poll at all. What's going on?

When Kukri replaced the earlier poll, those who had voted on that one are seeing some glitches with the new version. We are trying to understand why and fix it.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

When Kukri replaced the earlier poll, those who had voted on that one are seeing some glitches with the new version. We are trying to understand why and fix it.

Oh, that's good news. I thought something had happened to my account.

[Tribesman]

Nice to see you still know how to build a legion of strawmen, tribesy.

rabbit , it just shows that you put absolutely no thought into your rant about the government and the oil industry .....but nothing unusual there eh .

[Crazed Rabbit]

I ranted against onerous restrictions. You said:

Why can't they just let the companies do what they want ?

In case you've forgotten what a strawman is:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

CR

[Tribesman]

I ranted against onerous restrictions.

What onerous restrictions ???????
There were none , they complained that they changed the federal law ,but it didn't matter as they still wouldn't have been allowed under the states law anyway unles they fully complied with them too . These a normal restrictions and they are in place for a very good reason .
Like I said , if you don't want these restrictions just take a look at Nigeria , is that the sort of set up you want with the oil companies ?

[woad&fangs]

I'm surprised nobody posted this yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnRUKIMegn8

SNL skit with Tina Fey portraying Palin and Amy Poehler as Hillary Clinton.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

What onerous restrictions ???????
There were none , they complained that they changed the federal law ,but it didn't matter as they still wouldn't have been allowed under the states law anyway unles they fully complied with them too . These a normal restrictions and they are in place for a very good reason?

Tribes:

CR's point was not that any/all regulations should be scrapped, but that those regulations as practiced were functionally "onerous" and actively discouraged use of the leases. A reasonable review period and decent oversight is one thing, NINE YEARS is death by red tape.

[Tribesman]

Tribes:

CR's point was not that any/all regulations should be scrapped, but that those regulations as practiced were functionally "onerous" and actively discouraged use of the leases. A reasonable review period and decent oversight is one thing, NINE YEARS is death by red tape.

No it isn't , its normal business , the judgement said nothing at all about the 9 years , the only fault is with the 13 month delay due to the implimentation of the new legislation .

[ICantSpellDawg]

Accusation:Obama may have attempted to stall current troop withdrawals until after the elections were over.

Retort:
Campaign strongly contests

Sounds like an archetypal political move to me. What a jerk.

[CountArach]

Obama may have attempted to stall current troop withdrawals until after the elections were over.

Sounds like an archetypal political move to me. What a jerk.

It seems he is doing it out of realistic need. I agree he should be honest about his views, but I can see why he is doing this.

Meanwhile, in Palin news - Palin blockaded Abortion clinic (A quote from the guy whose book she tried to ban):

At one point during the hospital battle, passions ran so hot that local antiabortion activists organized a boisterous picket line outside Dr. Lemagie's office, in an unassuming professional building across from Palmer's Little League field. According to Bess and another community activist, among the protesters trying to disrupt the physician's practice that day was Sarah Palin.

Another valley activist, Philip Munger, says that Palin also helped push the evangelical drive to take over the Mat-Su Borough school board. "She wanted to get people who believed in creationism on the board," said Munger, a music composer and teacher. "I bumped into her once after my band played at a graduation ceremony at the Assembly of God. I said, 'Sarah, how can you believe in creationism -- your father's a science teacher.' And she said, 'We don't have to agree on everything.'

"I pushed her on the earth's creation, whether it was really less than 7,000 years old and whether dinosaurs and humans walked the earth at the same time. And she said yes, she'd seen images somewhere of dinosaur fossils with human footprints in them."