"While everyone has figured out that drilling won’t completely solve the main problem of energy independence, ..."
Right. The only thing that will solve this problem is investment in alternative energy.
"... it’s a nice stop gap measure and has the advantage of a relatively short turnaround time."
Clever use of the word "relative". Misleading at best.
" It might take a decade for alternative energy sources to begin to make a dent in our oil usage."
Your friend Jimmy Carter is probably rolling in his grave right now. What a pathetic wuss.
" But the effects of drilling – if begun now – can be measured in months."
You're talking about a speculative overall price change that will amount to nothing in the end. The problem is really the value of the dollar, but heaven forbid we should actually talk about that.
The most interesting part of this to me is conservatives calling themselves conservative. I've seen absolutely nothing to suggest conservation of any kind by so called conservatives. Nothing.
If people conserve by choice, they're given labels. "Tree hugger," "Activist," or "Hippie Scumbag." If they conserve because, well, there is no other option, then they're being sensible.
If anything, there's a ton of spouting off about nobody telling me I have to turn down my thermostat, or drive less, or have less excess. “I'll do that when and where I please” is the motto of modern so-called conservatives.
The ONLY thing that can cause positive change is when oil prices truly affect people's wallets. Pain at the pump is the thing that will free us of our minimal dependence on foreign oil, not pumping more oil. Furthermore what incentive would an oil company have to drill more anyway? They are making money hand over fist as it is by raising prices when they feel they need to.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 31.07.2008 @ 13:29
"...Obama is going to get a pass on Iraq and perhaps even receive a boost if his slaves in the media get their way."
What are your thoughts on this: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia27-2008jul27,0,712999.storyComment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 29.07.2008 @ 00:53
It's funny how much time you spend bashing the Democratic candidate while barley a sentence gets devoted to your Republican candidate.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 25.07.2008 @ 11:18
You created Barak Obama. He is constructed of your failure.
You need to find a way of overcoming us independents saying the following: "Oh, Republicans don't like him? The same Republicans who [insert failure here] after I went and voted for them before?"
I don't see a way around that right now. Good luck.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 24.07.2008 @ 14:37
*"He was wrong in that judgment and is now trying to claim that because conditions have changed, we should ignore his previous stupidity and laud him for his flexibility?"*
Frame it how you want, but a leader willing to course correct, or "flip-flop" when things change is infinitely better than the alternative, as we've seen.
Let's not forget, the past eight years have made it possible for the Obama juggernaut to exist in the first place. If not for monumental Republican failure, Obama would just be some ordinary senator from Illinois. The Republicans created him, not the Democrats.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 22.07.2008 @ 15:24
What's the difference between a "flip-flop" and "changing your mind due to new knowledge?"
I'd much prefer someone who's willing to adjust his thinking due to changing conditions. But the term "flip-flop" sounds so much more demeaning. Well played. In fact, it's what got your guy Bush elected the second time. Nobody can call him a flip-flopper, that's for sure. Keep up the good work.
The man is running on his "superior judgment." He was wrong in that judgment and is now trying to claim that because conditions have changed, we should ignore his previous stupidity and laud him for his flexibility?
It will work because the media will sell it that way. But from a purely logical standpoint, he should be as gone a goose as McCain.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 22.07.2008 @ 11:00
"...due to the fact that now we are enjoying a modicum of success in Iraq on all fronts."
Where do you get this information? I would like to read it too.
see reply to comment above.
ed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 17.07.2008 @ 13:18
"In short, the time is rapidly approaching when the Iraqis simply won’t need is anymore. And that’s been our goal all along."
No it hasn't.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 15.07.2008 @ 14:53
I completely baffles me why you would want to call yourself a Republican. It's like you're stuck in this world where you can't possibly vote for a Democrat, because, well, they're Democrats.
And the party you side with seems (from your writing, anyway) to share only a small portion of your ideology. I can only imagine how much it kills you that you'll be voting for McCain in the fall.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 14.07.2008 @ 11:58
Rick, you are right. $800 billion is the approximate cost if the war, debt interest, and services, end right now. Which they won't. But you knew that.
My "exaggeration" was all inclusive for the entire cost. Which, I absolutely guarantee will be trillions.
Let's not forget about the massive cost of the health care for the physically and mentally maimed veterans. Extrapolate that cost over the number of years that the very last one lives.
Add that to the cost of the continued occupation for untold years.
Trillions. Guaranteed.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.07.2008 @ 12:13