Darcy Burner has a new diary in the recommended list on Daily Kos: “Winning the House could stop the Iraq War and prevent more.” I urge you to read it and recommend it, not only because it’s great national exposure for a potential Democratic nominee, but because she makes some excellent points about why we need to take back Congress, and what we can all do to achieve this.
For those who don’t know, Darcy is seeking the Democratic nomination in WA’s 8th Congressional District, the seat currently held by Rep. Dave Reichert. I have had the opportunity to talk at length with both Darcy and the other declared candidate, Randy Gordon, and while they present very different personalities, I would be proud to have either represent me in Congress.
The 8th District has been trending Democrat for years. We can win this seat in 2006.
Another far lefty running for Congress..
Should be easy though, put Dean on the case. She could save some ad spend.
Well righton, you are right about one thing. It should be easy enough, what with Bushy approval ratings in the 30s….
Maybe we need more “far lefty’s” as it appears that the current bunch of “far righty’s” are royally screwing the pooch.
Hmmmm … Given the reliance of Bellevue on the 520 floating bridge (i.e. thousands of Microsoft commuters/day) I wonder if the State GOP support for I912 will piss off a substantial chunk of East Side voters who traditionally vote Republican.
Yeah…combined with the almost embarassing collapse of support for Republicans in power at the national level, the outrageous ventures into massive national debt, a failed war against terrorism (a.k.a. the biggest terrorist recruitment effort in history), and a $200 billion+ war to arrest a dictator, I think it is conceivable that the Republicans will lose the 8th district seat in ’06.
Last time I looked, Bush isn’t slated to run for anything in 2006 or 2008. The only lower than his approval ratings are democrats approval ratings.
I read through Darcy’s post. What I didn’t see was any acknowledgement that there are consequences to the actions she suggests. If we withdraw from Iraq tomorrow, we could be responsible for handing the country over to the terrorists.
Islamists are just waiting for us to do something like that, so they can step in and take over. If that is what you want to have happen, then at least say so clearly. Then, when hundreds of thousands die from these butchers, we can be clear about how it happened. Anyone watching what is happening in Chechnya?
Janet S @ 5 “…only lower than his approval ratings are democrats approval ratings” Right wing spin. His ratings are an indication that over 60 percent of Americans are fed up with his administration. Change is coming.
—
“…Islamists are just waiting for us to do something like that, so they can step in and take over.” More spin. The only people saying this are on Al-Jazeera.
—
“…what is happening in Chechnya?” What does this have to do with a House race in Wa State? Nothing. More spin.
—
Bottom line, Burner is right, we CAN win it back, but we all need to be watchful of our own backyards as well, so we don’t lose any seats through over confidence.
Janet @ 5
But that is just SOP for the Dems — do what feeeeeels good right now and to hell with the consequences. (and before you Lefties go off on Bush’s deficit spending, I do think that those running the GOP have lost their fiscal way)
Fire_one:
The Islamists are trying to take over that region of Russia. Could it be that there are a lot of unaccounted for nuclear missiles and nuclear materials in the area? I guess this counts as a “never mind” to liberals in this country, but it concerns me that a group who is determined to take over the world is actively at work to obtain a piece of Russia, and who knows what else.
So, when you advocate that we withdraw immediately from Iraq, you are playing according to al-Qaeda’s plan. I guess you can be naive that these people mean us no harm. Tell that to those in Indonesia, the Phillipines, Jordon, Syria. But those are people of color, and of no real consequence, I guess. Let’s just live in our happy little bubble that is the United States. I just bet they won’t bother us again, if we just leave them alone!
Janet S
“The only [thing] lower than his approval ratings are democrats approval ratings.”
Really? I suppose it’s all in what the meaning of “lower” is.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll :
“What is your preference for the outcome of the 2006 congressional elections: a Congress controlled by Republicans or a Congress controlled by Democrats?” Among registered voters (RV)
10/8-10/05
39% Controlled By Republicans
48% Controlled By Democrats
13% Unsure
Maybe that’s really more a matter of what you mean by “approval”
In the approval ratings on the same site, Dems and Reublicans are seaparated by 1 point in the “favorable” rating: 31 Dem and 32 GOP
But somehow a LOT more people would like to see a Democrat-controlled Congress, or so say the Communists at the Wall Street Journal.
Come on guys
Eastsiders expecting the Montlake and other libs to either outright kill 520 or goldplate it to death with sweeping arches, and salmon beaches, and bicycle viewpoints..
We won’t be pissed at GOP for financial prudence, only at Dems for not reigning in the loonies in Montlake.
ps, isn’t Foster Island an indian burial site?
News Flash: The Republicans will GAIN seats in the House in 2006. Book it!!
Hey Rightoff…
Everyone looks “far left” when you are that far off to the right.
@ 11
Medina folks are of the same mind on 520, so don’t excessively bash the Montlake set. Also, the Montlake folks are downright centrist on lots of other issues.
Swift boats\
As a Montlake resident till recently, I don’t know of anything Centrist there…unless you mean in the middle of Seattle area politics. Certainly by their voting record they are far left. My neighbors smoked pot and had Demo candidate stickers on their volvo and subaru.
Eastside folks not trying to gold plate 520, but rather limit its expansion beyond its current borders. Of course medina trying to delete the bus stop since bus riders bring riff raff into the neighborhood (what they are saying)
Well, JCH
It’s only happened once (that the president’s party has gained seats in an off-year election) since the 1920s and that was Bill Clinton’s second term. Hmmm, what was happening then? Oh yeah, Republicans got a big black eye for ramming through the bogus impeachment.
Hmmm, what’s happening now? The GOP House Majority Leader has been indicted for mopney laundering and conspiracy, the Senate Majority Leader has been subpoenaed by the SEC for insider trading, Rove and Libby look pretty indictable right about now, the house of cards continues to fall…
Oh, yeah, looks like a big Republican sweep.
Mark @ 7
“But that is just SOP for the Dems – do what feeeeeels good right now and to hell with the consequences.”
I don’t know … after 5 years of Bush failures and disasters (because the actions felt right to him), listening to the opposition seems prudent.
Curtis Love-16 ‘It’s only happened once (that the president’s party has gained seats in an off-year election)..’
Clinton never regained in 1996 and 1998 what he lost in 1994. It will be interesting, however, to see what the HA “team” will be saying if the repubs maintain or increase their margins in 2006. (What is the best way to cook crow?)
‘Hmmm, what’s happening now?’
It looks more and more like premature ejacu-lections by the dems. With one more year to clear the indictments, hopefully settle down Iraq and get the price of gas down to $2, the dems may be counting the proverbial chickens in the egg stage.
dj @ 17: “…listening to the opposition seems prudent.”
And that is EXACTLY my problem with today’s Left — the only thing they stand for is opposing whatever the Right says.
Personally, I’d like to see one of the rabid anti-Bushies actually say what they’re FOR… that they have a proactive PLAN of some kind. The fact that we’re in Iraq is a given. Does the Left really think that cutting and running is the best solution? That’s what it sounds like.
dj-17 ‘..after 5 years of Bush failures and disasters..’
In the little world most lefties inhabit that would be enough to sink Bush. There are many more people in the US that have supported Bush, and continue to do so. If it was half as bad as the lefties wail, Bush would not have even come close to beating Kerry. (Even with Kerry being such a poor candidate.)
Stop the war!!! [with B-52 Linebacker strikes!! They work EVERYTIME!!]
Oh, yeah, looks like a big Republican sweep.
Comment by Curtis Love — 10/17/05 @ 3:27 pm [Curtis, remember the look on Dan Rather’s face when Newt and the boys took over? Well, here we go again. You Maxine Waters liberals may carry Harlem and East LA, but the rest of the country hates you liberal commies.]
righton @ 15
Robert Rosencrantz, Montlake resident, endorsed by Gov. Dan Evans (yeah I know, lib. Republican) and was fawned over by Sharkansky and others during his race for city council. Montlake is notoriously NIMBY. ‘Sides, I know lots of GOoPers who smoke weed. Point is, I don’t think it’s politically liberal. Just ask the bartender at Montlake Ale House, location of Drinking Liberally.
Also, Medina has trouble sometimes with the constitution (they tried to ban door to door folks) and I am not suprised that they don’t like having the bus go through there.
Janet S @ 5 says:
” Then, when hundreds of thousands die from these butchers, we can be clear about how it happened. ”
We can be clear right now about how it happened. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have ALREADY died, because Bush invaded Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction that did not exist, while the terrorists were in Afghanistan.
Janet S @ 8 says:
“So, when you advocate that we withdraw immediately from Iraq, you are playing according to al-Qaeda’s plan.”
No, you poor sorry simple stupid sack of shit, The INVASION of Iraq played right into al-Qaeda’s plan. Now get the hell out of here, and take JCH with you.
righton @ 19
And that is EXACTLY my problem with today’s Left – the only thing they stand for is opposing whatever the Right says.
Personally, I’d like to see one of the rabid anti-Bushies actually say what they’re FOR… that they have a proactive PLAN of some kind. The fact that we’re in Iraq is a given. Does the Left really think that cutting and running is the best solution? That’s what it sounds like.
This claim is always made by the party in power (D or R) against the opposition. Obviously, it is easier to make noise about actions being undertaken rather than ideas and agenda that (by definition of a minority party) are on paper only.
As a non-party person I’ll say that I hear what I believe are good ideas from both Democrats and Republicans. Unfortunately, the NeoCons in power seem to be missing most of the good ideas.
But, I will agree with you on one thing. Nobody but nobody has a good plan on what to do about Iraq. Essentially, the NeoCons have dug themselves so far into a hole that there is little anyone can do about it without great uncertainty or unacceptable costs (in lives & dollars). It is stupid to blame the Democrats or some Republicans for the mistakes of the NeoCons, isn’t it?
ooops…I meant Mark @ 19
Sorry Mark–I don’t confuse you with Righton, and I apologize for the error!
Dems-
“…the 8th District has been trending democrat for years….we can win this seat…”
Another far left fairy tale.
yearight @ 20
“There are many more people in the US that have supported Bush, and continue to do so. If it was half as bad as the lefties wail, Bush would not have even come close to beating Kerry.”
Hmmmm … well what do the polls say? I mean, in November 2004, Bush’s approval rating averaged (over all major polls) was just a hair over 50% (i.e. about the same as the margin in the popular vote). Now, Bush’s approval rating averages 2 hairs under 40%
Here is the aggregate result: http://www.pollkatz.homestead......age001.gif
Here are the raw data: http://www.pollkatz.homestead......age001.gif
An objective reading would suggest that Bush has been abandoned by a bit more than 20% of those who supported him last November.
Curtis Love @ 9
One interesting point about those figures: The last time they were that lopsided was the ’94 election cycle. And we all know what happened then, don’t we?
Wouldn’t it be great if in ’06 the Republicans lost control if both the House and the Senate and Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House?
Then, Bush and Cheney are impeached and removed from office making Nancy Pelosi the President of the United States by the summer of ’07.
It’s a long shot, but not completely impossible. Pelosi for President in ’07!!
Win back the House. Please. Not gonna happen. Ever.
Current house has 231 Republicans, 202 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 1 Vacancy. Moonbats are not going to have net gain of 29. Not gonna happen. Not now. Not ever.
DJ-
Push-polling does not an election make. Put Hillary up and you’ll get every red blooded American out to vote against her.
@ 29
Famous last words?
dj @ 24
I think I have to agree with you on this in general. Those running the GOP right now are not who I consider to be true Republicans. Unfortunately, what happened to the WA GOP is happening on a national level. If GOP somehow gets its head out of its collective ass and puts up McCain or Giuliani, look for at least four if not eight more years of a GOP White House. The GOP’ers in power seem to have learned nothing from the implosion of the Dems. You can’t let the vitriolic fringes control the party. They need to realize that Bush didn’t really “win” 2004. Kerry lost it, just like Gore in 2000. JUST based on his 2004 Dem Convention speech, I’d think someone like Obama could do well if he were white. Sadly, I don’t think the rank-and-file Dems are as progressive as they’d like to think. I think it is offensive that the Left always patronizes minorities and treats them as perpetual victims. It is also sad that politicians rarely live up to their speeches. His talk of unity, self-responsiblity and agreeing-to-disagree was inspiring.
fire_one: Democratic Congressional Ratings are 32%, approve 48% disapprove. Reason Howard Dean and friends on the politics of personal destruction.
Danno @ 30,
“Push-polling does not an election make. Put Hillary up and you’ll get every red blooded American out to vote against her.”
“Push-polling” is something of a technical term, and none of the polls in the graphs I linked to are push-polls. (Push-polls are campaign tools, not polls).
The poll results I cited were from standard polling organizations–some liberal some conservative. You can make out the names of most of them on the graph at full-screen.
@ 33
“Reason Howard Dean and friends on the politics of personal destruction”
who gives a shit? the GOP is either gittin charges brought down or gittin investigated. the GOP’s got worse numbers, and their shitty assed numbers are rubbin off on the dems
so the GOP don’t go after people personally? you cunts called John Kerry a fucking war criminal.
OK, Libs……..Here’s a new way for Democrats to win votes. Follow Robert Mugabe’s new ideas on bring home the Democrat votes!!! Read on!!! Harare – A Zimbabwe judge has confirmed that President Robert Mugabe’s henchmen bought over opposition members with food in the March general election and threatened hungry peasants with starvation if they failed to back his ruling Zanu PF party. “It was made clear to the villagers that supporting the MDC (Movement for Democratic Change) meant going without food,” said High Court Judge Rita Makarau
Swift Boat Vets For Universal Healthcare….”That Christmas in Cambodia was seared, SEARED into my mind”!!!!! [hehe] JCH, LT, USN, 77-84
Sinking Swift Boat Vet: No you need to see the demographics. The questions are only about the donks.
dj-28 ‘An objective reading would suggest that Bush has been abandoned by a bit more than 20% of those who supported him last November. ‘
Polls, smolls. If that were as conclusive as you intend then what about Gregoire? The last poll I saw had her just under Bush.
http://www.strategicvision.biz.....l_0923.htm
Swift Boat-37 ‘..called John Kerry a fucking war criminal.’
Who? You are referring to the other swifties, and Kerry himself.
Huh? Didn’t Kerry come right out and admit to war crimes? He did.
yearight @ 41
If that were as conclusive as you intend then what about Gregoire?
What about Gregoire? I’ve made no claims as to her electability as you have about Shrub.
BTW: you cited a single poll, whereas I gave you a collection of hundreds of polls, showing a trend over time of the simpleton continuing down.
If we had multiple polls and polls taken over time, we would probably see a trend like this for Gregoire:
http://www.surveyusa.com/clien.....4e08492815
In any case, I was responding to your statement above that…
Your statement is complete bullshit, and unsupported by all empirical evidence.
so the GOP don’t go after people personally? you cunts called John Kerry a fucking war criminal.
Comment by Swift Boat Vets For Universal Healthcare— 10/17/05 @ 7:30 pm
Hey Swift Boat Vets, did you ever served in this Nation Armed Forces, or was it in the French Army? From what you been spouting about you didn’t serve in the Soviet Army, you would have been shot. They gave up on that trash you been talking about lately. What do you really know about John Kerry, Ted Kenndy, or matter-of-fact Jane Fonda? Please tell me that they didn’t support the North Vietnam during the War, and didn’t go to Paris and met with their Delegation. Tell me what were they talking about and who had the most to gain from the exchange of information? Hey Wabbit how is you day?
Mark @ 33
Thanks…I agree with much of what you said there.
(Shit! One of those embarassing man-hug moments again)
By my count (and the count of anyone who has completed….say a fourth-grade level of math) if the current house makeup is 232-201-2, the democrats would need to pick up 16 R seats to take control, not 29.
Math (among other things) doesn’t seem to be an area of expertise among Rednecks.
Wrong Again @1
How do you know Darcy is a “far lefty?” Do you know her? Have you ever heard her give a speech? Have you ever read anything she’s written? Do you know what her positions are? Betcha the answer is “no” to all of the above.
Righton, you’re just a knee-jerk winger who throws the “far lefty” label around like horsehoes. You ain’t no ringer, you’re a winger. You wing everything you post.
Dipshit.
6 more American soldiers killed in Iraq yesterday, and today House Republicans announced they plan to cut $50 billion from Medicaid, other programs for the poor, and farm programs.
Guess how much they plan to cut from corporate subsidies and tax breaks for the rich.
GOP = immoral bastards
Mark The Redneck @ 30
“not going to have net gain of 29”
You’re right — with DeLay indicted, Frist under investigation, Scooter Libby and Karl Rove about to be indicted, ad nauseum, the Democrats won’t win a net gain of 29 House seats in 2006.
It’ll be more like 100.
comment on 47
MTR probably double-dips his clients and his boss, too.
dj-44 ‘I’ve made no claims as to her electability as you have about Shrub.’
You were talking about the base abandoning Bush. I referenced the Gregoire poll and asked if that would count the same. What does “electibility” have to do with it. (And who cares about Bush’s electibility anyway?) The question was do you trust polls, or just some polls?
yearight @ 52,
“You were talking about the base abandoning Bush.”
Actually, YOU made the claim @ 20 that:
“[t]here are many more people in the US that have supported Bush, and continue to do so.”
I pointed out in 28 that
“An objective reading would suggest that Bush has been abandoned by a bit more than 20% of those who supported him last November.”
“The question was do you trust polls, or just some polls?”
I trust well-done polls, with clear methodology. But, I particularly trust the composite results of multiple polls. For instance, in the Bush polls I linked to above, the American Research Group polls tend to be biased toward slightly lower numbers, whereas Gallup polls tend to be biased upward (favoring Bush). Ideally, one would have multiple polls, and polls taken over time to understand public opinion. The graphs I cited paint a pretty clear picture.
RR @ 50
“It’ll be more like 100.”
Would you like to make friendly wager on that?
yearight @ 18
Why will gas prices come down? CheneyCo doesn’t want low gas prices. Their buddies get rich on high fuel prices and high gub’mint spending (to them).
JCH @ 22
remember the look on Dan Rather’s face when Newt and the boys took over?
I don’t get why you think that a situation where the (Democratic) majority party was badly stumbling (or at least painted that way by the opposition) and the minority gained seats corresponds exactly to an embattled, badly stumbling majority GAINING seats? I mean, outside of pure wishful thinking, why do you think these are parallel?
Curtis Love-55 ‘Why will gas prices come down?’
Supply and demand. Supplies will stabilize as demand goes down due to high prices.
Janet S @ 5, 8 e. al.
“Withdraw immediately?, sounds like we’re” No one has suggested this but you. Come on, leave the straw men at home.
Darcy said (and I quote:
If we control the House, we can demand a plan and a timeline for turning control of Iraq over to the Iraqis, forcing them to take responsibility for the future of their own country, and for bringing our troops home.
A paln! Fancy that! A timeline! Turning control of Iraq to Iraqis. If only the president had though of that. This stff is neither new nor radical. It’s just that we need a Congress who will get serious about carrying it out instead of faking it to keep the money spigot to the cronies wide open.
As for “Islamists,” are you referring to the pro-Irani Shi’ite clerics who are writing a new consitution every day and who have now consolidated political power and oil money in Iraq? THOSE “slamists?” Or do you mean the secular Baathists? THOSE “Islamists?” or do you mean al-Qaida, who does ot even operate in Iraq? THOSE “Islamists? Or do you mean the Sunni Kurd separatists, who appear to want only autonomy/independence (and the northern oil fields)? THOSE “Islamists?” A little specificity would be nice. It’s intellectually lazy, if politically convenient, to lump all Muslims or all who oopose US policy into a single group.
yearight @ 56
You’re quick, dude. Studies I have read indicate that the point at which price begins to have a significant effect on US demand is more like $6 per gallon. besides, we’re ut of the sumer driving season and into the home-heating season, which is a much less elastic behavior.
The more likely scenario is that prices continue to rise, and after a small fall will stabilize at a higher level as a new equilibirum is reached btween available supply and growing demand. Supply disruptions due to war, politics, or natural disaster will of course affect this. Supply INCREASES of any magnitude are unlikely in the short run.
Here’s a chart of Retail Gas Prices vs. Crude Oil Prices. Do you think large new supplies of crude are coming on line?
@6 “…only lower than his approval ratings are democrats approval ratings” Right wing spin. His ratings are an indication that over 60 percent of Americans are fed up with his administration. Change is coming.
Are you talking about Ron Sims? His approval rating is 35%.
http://www.surveyusa.com/clien.....c54d4abd9f (Question 3)
The 8th District has been trending Democrat for years. We can win this seat in 2006.
When Jennifer Dunn retired, I interpreted it to mean that she thought it would be ugly to try to hold on to the district in 2004, and that she didn’t want to go through that. That was my opinion, and though I’m no expert, she is, and it’s good to think an expert is confirming my inexpert opinion.
This district IMO is no longer going to elect anybody who tows the RW fundamentalist party line on abortion and other hot-button social issues. You could almost say that, with a full-time candidate, Democrats might have won the seat in 2004.
Reichert is very very careful about his positions in this area, but he needs to have the RW social agenda hung around his neck like an albatross.
Curtis Love-55 ‘Their buddies get rich on high fuel prices..’
This is rich. (No pun intended.) I apologize as I am experiencing whiplash from the wailing about Bush going to war for oil, (presumably to increase supply), to reduced supplies allow the oil comkpanies to take immoral profits from the US. The “windfall” profit numbers whisking around the internet are large compared to a few years ago when oil was at $10/barrel. Yet they are small as compared to many other commodity-type companies such as Microsoft and Ben and Jerry’s. I read the other day that 3/4 of Exxon profit this year came from companies outside of the US. If averaged over several years the profits demeaned are relatively low as compared to companies adored by so-called progressives.
When the price of oil and gas is low I never hear any lefties calling for price supports, other than for the vote-rich ethanol programs.
Curtis Love-58 ‘..the point at which price begins to have a significant effect on US demand is more like $6 per gallon.’
Time will tell. There are, however, many indications that demand for gas is already falling.
http://www.google.com/search?h.....ine+demand
Other signs include plummeting sales of SUVs, especially the larger ones. Why no cheer on the left – high gas prices may do more to encourage mass transit than anything.
‘..the home-heating season, which is a much less elastic behavior.’
Granted, yet global warming helps mitigate the heating problems. And again, the original point related to the 2006 elections, when the winter’s heating costs will not be a big issue. The price of gas through the summer, however, will be the key.
‘Supply INCREASES of any magnitude are unlikely in the short run.’
I agree for NEW supplies. Bringing the disabled wells and refinineries back on-line will surely help.
‘Do you think large new supplies of crude are coming on line?’
Not that I know about, except for the less-than-credible 500k barrel/day promised by OPEC. Again, repairing the downed wells and refineries are the main source of “new” supply. That will combine with reduced demand to settle the price lower. I am hoping for $2/gallon, as I think that reduction would get the issue off the front burner.
Remember last year when $2 gallon gasoline seemed outrageous?
This is exactly how they get lemmings like you to run off the cliff.
Nice piece of work you yum yum.
Curtis @ 57:
“‘…we can demand a plan and a timeline…’ A p[la]n! Fancy that! A timeline! Turning control of Iraq to Iraqis. If only the president had though of that. This stff is neither new nor radical.”
Yes, it sounds like the seeds of a plan — or, if you actually read what it says, the plan is “to make a plan.” Well, duh! And if you watch the MSM, numerous military experts have said that a timeline is the WRONG thing to do. You leave when the job is done.
“…do you mean al-Qaida, who does [n]ot even operate in Iraq?”
So, al-Zarqawi is just vacationing in Iraq?
GBS-63 ‘Nice piece of work you yum yum.’
Ouch.
Every lefty who complains about the high price of oil forgets that China and Indai are taking on more imports which drives the demand cost curve higher. China now imports 40% of it’s oil production and aims for 80% by 2010. Just google it lefties. I placed links when lead-where-the-sun-don’t shine lucite talked about high oil costs. It’s from those non-Kyoto signing third world countries (like China and India) whom pollute with no emissions controls. That’s why oil goes up. But then again most lefties here on animal hind parts don’t read the fine URL links I place on this blog. It would force you into the light of reality instead of your small cocoon-like intellectual prisons of darkness.
Puddybud-65
If the prices were tanking instead the lefties would be complaining that Bush got the extra oil on the backs of Iraqis and that low prices discourage conservation, especially for the SUV crowd.
Puddypud @ 65
Thanks for making two Progressive points for us:
1) We need to get behind Sen. Cantwell’s effort to get us of foregin oil.
2) World wide oil demand has more to do with prices at the pump then does the refining capacity.
GBS-67
‘We need to get behind Sen. Cantwell’s effort to get us of foregin oil.’
Very selective. The lefties have spent decades railing and litigating against new drilling for oil in the US.
‘World wide oil demand has more to do with prices at the pump then does the refining capacity.’
That is part of the problem. Refining limitations also affect the price of REFINED products like gasoline. Also, the mishmash of special gasoline blends required by the “progressive” states is another non-minor price and supply driver.
Oil is solar energy stored as matter. We need to go directly to the source. The problem is that the rich and powerful need to figure a way to make you keep paying them money. What are they going to do? If you have solar and don’t pay them, are they going to pass a law making them able to cover your house with a huge cardboard box?
@ 68
Do you follow the stock market?
Do your homework before you make a statement about refining capacity instead of believing everything Sean Hannity feeds you.
John Kerry said it best: We have to invent our way out of this problem, not drill our way out.
I know bold, new, creative thinking is a bit much for you conservative types, but it’s visionary leadership like that of JFK’s that led the US to the technological advantages we enjoy today. From our homes to distant battlefields President Kennedy’s vision still advances our lives today.
What do you think history will say about the culture of corruption in W’s administration and his lies and military blunders?
Trust me when I say he won’t be an icon like John F. Kennedy.
Nice try though, Bub.
@70 We have to invent our way out of this problem, not drill our way out.
He probably also believes we can’t pave our way out of traffic conjestion, we need other means of traffic. How well is that working out?
yearight @ 61
I apologize as I am experiencing whiplash from the wailing about Bush going to war for oil, (presumably to increase supply)
I wonder why you have so much trouble seeing clearly. The reason we are there is to SECURE the supply, not increase it. That’s why the 14 permanent bases are under construction.
to reduced supplies allow the oil comkpanies to take immoral profits from the US.
Yes, for the Texans whose oil is more expensive to produce than their foreign competitors. They, after all, are the big Bush donors. The connection never occurred to you? Of course not.
The “windfall” profit numbers…are small as compared to many other commodity-type companies such as Microsoft and Ben and Jerry’s.
I don’t think that anyone here has said that an aim of anyone is to reduce operating costs, Mr. Straw Man.
I read the other day that 3/4 of Exxon profit this year came from companies outside of the US.
Really? I read the other day that Exxon last year made a larger profit than any time in its history. ANd maybe more than any company in history. I think Microsoft would be pretty damn happy to make $25 billion profit in 1 YEAR. (Cut to Exxon CEO, crying about how they cannot afford to build a refinery).
Of course, it’s been that way for a while. Exxon Mobil set record profit in 2003
When the price of oil and gas is low I never hear any lefties calling for price supports, other than for the vote-rich ethanol programs.
What “lefties call for” are alternatives to the oil that is reaching the end of its run as a cheap plentiful fuel. Put on your glasses; it seems you’re a bit nearsighted.
GBS-70
What are you talking about?
Curtis Love-72
‘The reason we are there is to SECURE the supply..’
Like Saddam was keeping oil from the market? His only real source of income? Most of the other tin hat speculation on reasons Bush bombed Iraq are more feasible.
‘The “windfall” profit numbers…are small as compared to many other commodity-type companies such as Microsoft and Ben and Jerry’s.
I don’t think that anyone here has said that an aim of anyone is to reduce operating costs, Mr. Straw Man.”
What are you referring to?
‘Really? I read the other day that Exxon last year made a larger profit than any time in its history.’
You are certainly taking into account that Exxon recently bought Mobil, which made it a much larger company?
‘I think Microsoft would be pretty damn happy to make $25 billion profit in 1 YEAR.’
Especially since their revenues are only around 9 billion. As a percentage of revenue Microsoft made 2.9 billion profit on 9.2 billion of revenue. Exxon made 25.3 billion on 298 billion in revenue. For the math-challenged that is 31.5% and 8.5% for Microsoft and Exxon respectively. Under 10% profit margin is windfall? If so I have lots of stock tips for you that can’t lose.
Oh, and some of the Exxon profit was from non-oil/fuel operations, and much was made in other countries.
‘What “lefties call for” are alternatives to the oil that is reaching the end of its run as a cheap plentiful fuel.’
That is a nice, lofty goal. The left’s credibility regarding short and long-term shortages goes in the garbage, however, with the non-stop protest and litigation over additional domestic supplies.
The irony is that, like the technology field, the alternate energy methods of the future likely come with great profits for capitalists. Not to worry though. There will be plenty of unkowns that will cause even more environmental damage, and plenty of long-term health effects to keep the litigation lobby swamped in cash.
yeawrong @ 73
What are you talking about, what am I talking about?
Reply to 54
Tell you what I’ll do. If events prove me right, I’ll rub your face in it for the rest of your life.
yearight @ 74
Briefly:
My comment about operating costs goes to yours on margins. Margins are one way of measuring. Dollars is another. A company that has a 10% margin and realizes $100,000 profit is one thing, and a company with a 10% margin that realizes $25 billion is quite another. And that profit was not just the largest in teh company’s history (BTW, they merged some years ago now), but the largest of any company in history. They DOUBLED their ($ amount) profit from 2000 to 2001, and so did BP Amoco, Chevron and Texaco. I didn’t say “windfall,” you did. To me it sounds more like payoffs from the government.
Yes, Exxon had worldwide operations. They pump a lot of crude. And look here! Crude is at what $65 a barrel? Kinda nice for them to have a government with a global reach plump up their business for them.
The left’s credibility regarding short and long-term shortages goes in the garbage, however, with the non-stop protest and litigation over additional domestic supplies.
Like ANWAR? DOn’t make me laugh. The droplets we’ll be getting from that won’t mitigate the pretty predictable coming disruptions (wait ’til the house of Saud falls…hoo boy!) and other hikes now that peak oil has passed. We can’t pump our way to energy independence, so it didn’t make a lot of sense to the non-greedy to open up one of our last unspoiled widllife refuges. We have to conserve and innovate.
great profits for capitalists…
Oh, I forgot I am supposed to be a Communist or something because I favor conservation and don’t want to see America be turned into an ATM for Exxon. So sorry to disappoint you. Bill Gates is a capitalist. So is Goerge Soros. So is Jon Corzine. Get used to it.
yearight
I forgot this one:
The reason we are there is to SECURE the supply..’Like Saddam was keeping oil from the market? His only real source of income?
That’s “aluminum foil hat” or “tinfoil hat,” thank you.
Doik. It’s not about whether Saddam was selling oil, or whether a new Iraqi regime might. THE WORLD IS RUNNING OUT OF OIL. We stepped in to militarily stake out a territorial claim on some of it. It’s the beginning of what I have been privately calling “the coming Oil Wars” for some years now. It’s the beginning, not the end.
Curtis Love-77
‘..and a company with a 10% margin that realizes $25 billion is quite another.’
You make it sound like it would be better if Exxon split into 10 companies, each with 2.5 billion in profit. Your argument about the small company with 10% margin being different is silly and without basis.
‘To me it sounds more like payoffs from the government.’
From which government? The Chinese, whose imporation of oil has skyrocketed the last few years? You offer only speculation here.
‘Kinda nice for them to have a government with a global reach plump up their business for them.’
Are you saying that if the US left the Iraqi wells burning and that oil remained off the market the Bush cronies would be better off? Leaving the wells in Kuwait burning and out of production would have also helped the cronies of Bush Sr. as well? The lefty arguments regarding going to war for oil fall apart when you state that what really helps the Bush cronies is oil shortages.
‘We can’t pump our way to energy independence, so it didn’t make a lot of sense to the non-greedy to open up one of our last unspoiled widllife refuges.’
We could be much closer to independence if there were many more oil fields in operation. ANWR is only one of many places that could be tapped. And it only takes a small fraction of the innovation and technology required for the loftier goals to ensure drilling does not spoil the land or oceans.
‘We have to conserve and innovate.’
No problem with that. But to put our collective heads in the sand regarding near-term energy needs, including the cost and international considerations, is at best negligent.
‘Bill Gates is a capitalist..’
The left uses class warfare selectively. Your regurgitating how bad Exxon’s 10% profit is, while giving Microsoft a pass at 31% is inconsistent at best. Using absolute dollars regardless of the size of a business does nothing to advance the left’s arguments. The automobile, with its ICE that spews polution, urban sprawl and freedom has been the natural enemy of the left for decades. If Exxon had the same sales and profit numbers but was publishing Bibles the left would not care. (Although with that many Bibles in circulation it might give the left some heartburn.)