Our economy is saved!!!

[Against Miik!]

You know, as much as I really don't like Barack Obama that much, it is things like this that make me think I might vote for him. Even if I don't agree with at least any of his policies, at least I know that there is probably something goin on in that head of his. Something is working.

That cannot be said for Hillary Clinton, and especially not John McCain, who might actually be legally braindead. I'm not sure what they shoot him up with to make him look so life like when in front of cameras. I need to get me some, whatever it is.

Anyways, old news in the rest of the world, new news on MX. John McCain has proposed a gasoline tax holiday that would suspend the 18 cent tax we pay on each gallon of gasoline we buy. Hillary Clinton, who would suck on every **** and tit in America for just one more vote, is also on board with this idea.

Now, not only is this not a good idea, not only is it not just a neutral idea, with no consequences...it is in fact, a very bad idea. This little article or blog entry here really lays it out best:

http://www.theseminal.com/2008/04/29/clinton-on-board-with-mccains-stupidest-idea-to-date/

Stories like this may seem inconsequential, minute compared to some of the bigger issues. But I disagree. Things like this really represent the BIGGEST issue. It says a lot about the character of the candidates. Will they simply pander to the flavor of the week to gain votes or support? Or do they actually think about the consequences of their actions. We can safely say that over the last eight years, arguably 20 or longer, we have not had leadership that thinks about the consequences of their actions.

If nothing else, I hope that a guy like Obama could at least offer that. I sure am not looking for it from anybody else.

[TheDMV]

What I like best about Obama's position here is that he's not willing to just take the easy way out; he won't try to please voters with a tax break when it won't help. Gas prices will continue to go up because the world is running out of gas, and we need long term solutions, not this tax break facade of "aid".

[Against Miik!]

We may have already hit peak oil, but the reason oil is so expensive right now, today, is because of the weak dollar. McCain most likely does not even take that into account, and his solution certainly will not help the matter.

[Russell]

The tax may have an iota of feasibility if the funds weren't tied to such essential things as roads.

[Ando!]

"You can't pay off a debt by taking out a credit card in China and putting it in your grandchildren's names"

[marcus_in_absentia]

Haha. Indeed.

[Akira]

The tax may have an iota of feasibility if the funds weren't tied to such essential things as roads.

Or if the gas companies wouldn't just bump up their prices to pre-tax cut levels.

[EinzingerIsGod]

The tax may have an iota of feasibility if the funds weren't tied to such essential things as roads.

Not to mention it will save the average person something like 30 cents a day...woopie.

And just to add on, John McCain is braindead. There is no denying it:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/mccain-stumbles-on-hiv-prevention/

Edit: Here is what I have been saying for over a year now which Obama started to mention a few months back. This is how you reduce our dependency on oil and fix the economy.

Pull out of Iraq and use the money we are wasting there to invest in a massive green energy industry complete with grants for research and all that good stuff. Develop top notch green technology and implement it here at home. The transfer to this new kind of energy will create plenty of jobs all over the country. Then as we turn towards a green society, turn around and sell this technology to the rest of the world. It's like a mix of the New Deal and the microchip boom of the 70's.

[mph4ever]

i think you will find that the germans are way ahead of everyone on this. they have developed the best technology for harnessing solar energy. they saw this as an opportunity and went about their business with serious tax incentives.

and the chinese are frantically catching up

we pay nearly $10 a gallon here in ireland. on top of that we pay a road tax based on engine size. on top of that we pay vehicle registration tax of 30% of the cost of the car and 21% vat. they just introduced some legislation that cars will be vrt'd based on emissions and road tax will also be based on emissions. the law comes in from july 1st. every car bought previous to that will be taxed asttodays rate. the whole country will be buying hybrids.

[Permanent Solution]

The depressing part about this issue is that I hear people calling Obama elitist over it and saying he doesn't understand what it's like to be poor.

So much for being right.

[EinzingerIsGod]

and the chinese are frantically catching up

China is very, very, very far from being green.


very

[muthafunkabass]

Or if the gas companies wouldn't just bump up their prices to pre-tax cut levels.
I thought the government set the prices?

[mph4ever]

China is very, very, very far from being green.


very

i meant that they are very advanced in the development of green technologies, they have no reason to implement them for themselves because they really don't care for the environment of the health of their people

[Aaron]

America should just stop spending money on useless things they can't afford.

[Ando!]

China is very, very, very far from being green.


very

idk dude have you seen the rivers?

[Smokey D]

i meant that they are very advanced in the development of green technologies, they have no reason to implement them for themselves because they really don't care for the environment of the health of their people

They're frantically trying to institute greener technologies but they can only implement them slowly because if economic growth is compromised the CCP loses much of its power. But if they don't do something soon they will also ultimately lose power even more dramatically.

[mph4ever]

do you think there is a real threat of revolution?

[Smokey D]

Not imminently but maybe if things start going wrong. More importantly, the CCP believes it is absolutely necessary to sustain economic growth at 10% a year and will apparently do pretty much anything to do it. Ultimatley though ecological collapse will be just as damaging to the economy as other economic forces.

[mph4ever]

its sad, there are so many people involved

[DekWannaBFlea]

May 02, 2008
Hot Air Over Gas Tax
By Eugene Robinson

There's something maddening about this presidential campaign. It has become irrelevant whether anything the candidates say actually makes sense. All that matters is how their words will "play" with voters who are presumed to be too stupid to realize that they're the ones being played.

The nonsense du jour is the "proposal" by both Republican John McCain and Democrat Hillary Clinton to suspend the federal gasoline tax. I put the word proposal in quotes because it's obvious that neither candidate is serious about this. They both must know that it won't happen, and they both must know why it shouldn't.

Actually, McCain might not understand why lifting the tax of 18.4 cents per gallon is a bad idea -- remember, he has confessed that the economy isn't his strong suit. I'd bet the ranch that Clinton understands, though. And before either campaign indignantly proclaims its candidate's total sincerity, I'd like to see the legislation that either of these U.S. senators has introduced to suspend the tax.

I'm still waiting.

The price of gasoline is indeed one of the most urgent pocketbook issues facing a nation in which there are more motor vehicles than licensed drivers. Having to pay close to $4 a gallon is a real hardship for many Americans who have no other way to get through the day -- commuting to work, picking up the kids, shopping at the grocery store -- except by automobile.

Cutting the price at the pump, even by 18 cents, would help. But economists agree that suspending the gas tax wouldn't have a prayer of achieving that goal.

What would happen? Well, we're heading into the summer months, when consumption of gasoline always peaks -- and when refineries are making just about as much gasoline as they can. If the tax were to be suspended, gas would cost less and people would want to buy more of it. Demand would rise, supply wouldn't -- and thus the price would ultimately go up. There's no way on God's earth that consumers would end up saving anywhere near 18 cents a gallon.

What else would happen? The money from the gas tax goes into a trust fund that pays for construction and repair of highways and bridges. If the tax were suspended for the summer, the fund would lose $9 billion. That would mean less maintenance of potholed roads and rusting bridges -- and no jobs for thousands of people who otherwise would have been hired on work crews.

What else would happen? All the rhetoric from McCain and Clinton about climate change would be revealed to be just so much hot air since their proposal would encourage people to drive more, thus spewing more carbon into the atmosphere. If climate change really presents a grave threat to the planet, one of the quickest and most effective ways of attacking the problem would be a dramatic increase in the federal gasoline tax.

The House Democratic leadership opposes suspending the gas tax, so the whole thing is moot -- except perhaps as a case study in political cynicism: Say any damn thing you think the voters want to hear, even if you know it's a terrible idea and won't happen anyway. Psssst, voters: McCain and Clinton think you're too dumb to catch on.

Barack Obama deserves credit for insisting that a gas tax hiatus would be wrong. But I can think of issues on which he, too, is quick to emphasize a crowd-pleasing policy but slow to mention all the messy, uncertain and possibly counterproductive ramifications. On how to proceed in Iraq, for example, I don't think the candidates are being particularly honest about how painfully unpleasant it will be to withdraw (Obama and Clinton) or stay (McCain).

On Iraq, though, there are so many variables that each candidate's best-case scenario is at least plausible. What gets me about the gasoline tax issue is that everyone knows the whole thing is a nonstarter. So why are we even talking about it? And why are we talking about how voters will react, if what they're reacting to is imaginary?

This is supposed to be an election, not a casting call. If we vote on the basis of who can best play "populist-lite" -- who can more convincingly furrow his or her brow in empathy with the struggle of "ordinary" Americans -- then we'll be electing an actor in chief, not a president. And we'll get what we deserve.
eugenerobinson@washpost.com

(c) 2008, Washington Post Writers Group
Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/hot_air_over_gas_tax.html at May 05, 2008 - 05:06:03 PM CDT
------------------------

One more reason not to vote for Clinton or McCain.

[Permanent Solution]

To be honest this one was my favorite:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080505/pl_nm/usa_politics_dc_13
Clinton dismisses "elite" economists on gas tax plan

[beastman168]

we need an alternative fuel. We should probably start with mass transportation; i.e. trains, buses, airplanes (terrible industry)

[Aaron]

^ exactly. Public transport + use of hybrid vehicles + better city planning.

[Permanent Solution]

City planning needs to be done with commuting in mind though.

Phoenix is one of the most well-planned cities in America...and it takes over an hour to get from one side to the other.

[Against Miik!]

City planning won't do anything at this point, although that doesn't mean its not important. Most major cities in US were made for urban sprawl.

This is a problem because in America, as opposed to other countires, cars are not just a luxury, they are a neccesity, unless we adapt to public transportation. We're greedy right now, because we have had these artificially low gas prices. When they get to a certain point, the financial strain of continuing to drive will be worse than the inconvenience of a lifestyle change. But even when some people get the point, it won't matter, because they will still need to use their car to get places.

It is at this point, that we will have serious problems.

[Permanent Solution]

I mean, that's the thing though. I would love to use public trans to go to work, but this year, work is 20 minutes away driving. Well over an hour using public trans. It's just impractical, and uneconomical.

We need less sprawled cities.

[Aaron]

..or employer's to embrace technology and allow more users to work from home, not just those returning from maternity leave.

[Against Miik!]

Those are both good solutions, far better than ethanol.

I knew that would be a disaster, I'm sure we could for a post of mine from a year ago saying it. I mean, not only are fuel prices still rising, which raises prices of everything else due to transportation costs, but there is a small food shortage going occuring. And while we first worlders don't really have to worry about running out of food any time soon, we are definitely feeling the rise in prices.

[Aaron]

I think the most important thing is changing people's perceptions of what cars are to be used for. 1000m is not far to walk to get milk and bread...

[Dave de Sylvia]

we pay nearly $10 a gallon here in ireland.
It's about $7, and that will naturally fall when the dollar balances out.

But yeah, I was pleased to see Obama was willing to cut through the bullshit on this issue and risk the political hit that the Hillary campaign has seized upon. It gives me hope that he's not so committed to some of the other populist ideas he's been associated with.

[Permanent Solution]

..or employer's to embrace technology and allow more users to work from home, not just those returning from maternity leave.
Although I am a huge advocate for working from home, I also have enough industry experience to know that it's impractical to even have a majority of (corporate) workers working from home at this point. The tech will be there within 10 years I think, but it's not yet.

[Against Miik!]

One concern of having a sizable chunk of people working from home is what it would do to the economies of downtown areas.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I mean, that's the thing though. I would love to use public trans to go to work, but this year, work is 20 minutes away driving. Well over an hour using public trans. It's just impractical, and uneconomical.

We need less sprawled cities.
Why is an hour in transit impractical? I do that every day.

[Aaron]

^ I leave home at 5:15am and get to work at 7:40am.

Although I am a huge advocate for working from home, I also have enough industry experience to know that it's impractical to even have a majority of (corporate) workers working from home at this point. The tech will be there within 10 years I think, but it's not yet.
Here at least, in Australia, we have the neccesary technology and infrastructure. I commute 4 hours total a day, which is about 2/5th of my working day, so I'd much rather be at home working... sucks that, because I'm only 22, my work sees that type of request as me being lazy, unless I'm knocked up or injured.

Ideally, in corporate offices, I'd like to see a scenario where people are at home 3 days per week, and have two "core days" where the whole office comes in collaboration and meetings.

[Permanent Solution]

Why is an hour in transit impractical? I do that every day.
Because if I can do it in less than half the time, my hourly rate means that I make more, even accounting for gas and other car expenditures, if I just drive, instead of losing the 45+ mins.

Here at least, in Australia, we have the neccesary technology and infrastructure. I commute 4 hours total a day, which is about 2/5th of my working day, so I'd much rather be at home working... sucks that, because I'm only 22, my work sees that type of request as me being lazy, unless I'm knocked up or injured.
No, like I said, I completely agree with this. I feel the same way and in fact working from home saves the company and the worker money, but I don't think it's all there. The internet infrastructure, at least in America, is pitiful. Video conferencing is still too low quality for many applications (but I'm working on low bit rate video enhancement in school right now, so i know they'll be here sooner than later).

edit2edit: the reason that won't work, is that meetings need to happen on a moment's notice, and they need to happen immediately. It would be a huge mess without the ability to never come in to work, because people would plan to not come, and then find out that they needed to at the last minute.

[Aaron]

You need federal investment in a national ADSL2+ grid then ;)

Two years ago I used to travel a lot. Now I have a base office and video-con facilities I use weekly.

[Permanent Solution]

Yes, but federal investment in internet infrastructure is non-existent to my knowledge. Remember, America is all about privatization and the free market and such.

I could set up a home office easily barring the two factors I mentioned...but they are significant (and yes, video conferencing is important).

[Iskandar]

Get a bike. Seriously.

[Permanent Solution]

My bike broke :(

Oh also I should mention the positive aspect of public trans that Phoenix recently added. A new set of short-route buses for the neighborhoods surrounding the campus were implemented, and I never drive to campus anymore unless I need to be there after buses stop running.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

anything less than an hour each way on public transport isn't worth whining about.

[Against Miik!]

It's not worth whining about because its so common but that doesn't mean that if there is a more efficient way to get things done that we shouldn't explore those options.

[ringworm]

canceling the gas tax is like the absolute wrong message to send

instead of saying we need to get off oil, these idiots are basically saying, elect me, i'll make it cheaper, and hilary is using it too, LOL, where is that guy with a hilary avatar, nice :/

[Ando!]

and somehow the fact that barack isn't a panderer is going to be taken as "Well that elitist sumbitch doesn't understand the people and their needs don't vote for HIM"

[ringworm]

exactly

and on another note:
NC woot!!! and everyone thinks we're a buncha backwoods hicks, we picked the black used to be muslim funny name guy, wass up indiana? :)

[Iskandar]

Who did you vote for, Ringworm?

[ringworm]

obamaylammy

[Iskandar]

I don't get it. But I'm glad you voted for Obama.

[ringworm]

dont get what, how i voted? :)

[Iskandar]

No, I don't get what obamaylammy means. I admit, though, it's a bit of a stretch from Ron Paul to Barack Obama.

[ringworm]

lol about obamaylammy

my political views stretch from both sides, and depending on my mood, can alter, while still being able to stay oriented somehow, sometimes just depending on how something is said or presented, rather than its content? im a weirdo, hippy southerner, if that makes sense

there is a large group in this region similar, strong country, rural, upbringing, yet good education and respect for everyone else, our emotions or beliefs probably resemble a tug of war between what we know and how we were raised

many issues do bother us slightly (gay marriage, abortion etc, and not just because of religion, just morally), but we have good enough sense to understand basic rights of everyone, and just do it so we can really tackle the tough problems ahead, and really try to fix whats been neglected, like our planet

[Iskandar]

Are you opposed to abortion and gay marriage?

[ringworm]

the thought of an abortion totally makes my stomach churn
i wish there was no need for them
they are used more as contraceptive than a health procedure
all that said

my hippy upbringing cant allow me to dictate someone elses choice

same with gay marriage, same with drug laws, i feel seatbelt laws are unjust or helmet laws

you cant tell people what to do, within personal limits of course, but the capacity to live this way is being run over by morons with nothing in sight but their own objectives

this is why i will always have that, "back in my day" tone

it was so cool then

[Ando!]

lol about obamaylammy

my political views stretch from both sides, and depending on my mood, can alter, while still being able to stay oriented somehow, sometimes just depending on how something is said or presented, rather than its content? im a weirdo, hippy southerner, if that makes sense

there is a large group in this region similar, strong country, rural, upbringing, yet good education and respect for everyone else, our emotions or beliefs probably resemble a tug of war between what we know and how we were raised

many issues do bother us slightly (gay marriage, abortion etc, and not just because of religion, just morally), but we have good enough sense to understand basic rights of everyone, and just do it so we can really tackle the tough problems ahead, and really try to fix whats been neglected, like our planet

I sort of know where you're coming from. Even though I'm a pretty liberal guy, any candidate who isn't big on party politics is a pretty appealing candidate. Ron Paul is an idiot and you could never actually run a country that way, but he was refreshing in that he wasn't another in a line of neo-conservatives.

[ringworm]

thats pretty spot on

when all we have is obama, clinton and mccain,
most people like me who wish for radical change or departure from status quo have few options

Is obama that person? i dunno, only time will tell, but supporting the others, especially mccain, is out of the question entirely

[griftadan]

I thought the government set the prices?

what is this venezuela

and no the companies wouldn't keep the same prices especially if everyone knew about the tax cut

[BigBadBooDooDady]

I was impressed with Obama for being man enough to tell the truth that it's a stupid idea.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

the fact that people are impressed by that is kind of sad. are things really so pathetic that candidates get props for being the only one not to say something absolutely moronic?

[Independent_CA]

Just some predictions that I bet will be true (even if Obama wins):

1) We will still be at war in Iraq for the foreseeable future.
2) The economy will still be heading into recession.
3) The dollar will continue to get weaker.
4) There will still be the possibility of conflict with Iran.
5) Oil prices will remain high and have a decent chance of rising.
6) Domestic problems (healthcare, social security, the debt, etc) will still go largely unsolved.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Just because the president changes doesn't mean the whole country's phobia of socialized health care or inability to save money will go away. I like obama but i don't think he's a miracle worker.

[Smokey D]

I don't see a conflict with Iran.

[Against Miik!]

Well you should see one, if you have the ability to recognize simple patterns. Maybe we won't invade on the scale of Iraq (or maybe we will) but we will at least have some sort of presence there in the not so distant future.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Just some predictions that I bet will be true (even if Obama wins):

1) We will still be at war in Iraq for the foreseeable future.
2) The economy will still be heading into recession.
3) The dollar will continue to get weaker.
4) There will still be the possibility of conflict with Iran.
5) Oil prices will remain high and have a decent chance of rising.
6) Domestic problems (healthcare, social security, the debt, etc) will still go largely unsolved.
2 and 3 are doubtful, 4 is never going to happen and 5 is inevitable whatever the new President does.

[Smokey D]

Miik, I'll buy you a coke if I'm wrong.

[Against Miik!]

Make it diet and you got a deal

[Independent_CA]

2 and 3 are doubtful, 4 is never going to happen and 5 is inevitable whatever the new President does.
What makes you say 2 and 3 are doubtful?

Number 4 still remains a very distinct possibility because most of the military commanders and civilian bureaucracy that plan these types of things are still going to have the same job when the next president takes office.

Number 5, you're right. It doesn't have much of anything to do with the president, but apparently some people think it does with all this talk of getting rid of the gas tax and so on. I just wanted to point that out.

[Iskandar]

Attacking Iran would be nutty. It's not going to happen.

[Dave de Sylvia]

What makes you say 2 and 3 are doubtful?
2 because the economy has already begun to stabilise, and consumer confidence is on the rise. 3 because it's on the rise and remains unrealistically low.

Number 4 still remains a very distinct possibility because most of the military commanders and civilian bureaucracy that plan these types of things are still going to have the same job when the next president takes office.
But it's not even a distinct possibility under the current administration.

[Iskandar]

Attacking that battle station ain't my idea of courage. It's more like ... suicide.

[Against Miik!]

Two out of the three presidential candidates said they would be willing to strike Iran. I'd be willing to bet that sentiment isn't held by only them.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Willing to strike Iran in the event of what? I doubt there's a person in the US who would rule out war in every instance.

[Independent_CA]

But it's not even a distinct possibility under the current administration.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. A conflict doesn't mean a full scale war, it could be anything from some skirmishes on the Iraq/Iran border or out in the Persian Gulf to some bombing raids or anything in between. Keep in mind that the new administration, especially a democratic one, is going to have a somewhat free pass on their first few month of foreign policy decisions.

[DekWannaBFlea]

Attacking Iran would shoot oil prices sky high and cripple our economy. It won't happen.

[Iskandar]

Not to mention destabilizing the entire region.

[Against Miik!]

Willing to strike Iran in the event of what? I doubt there's a person in the US who would rule out war in every instance.

Specifically? In the result of Iran taking hostile action towards Israel. That doesn't necessarily mean that Iran directly strikes Israel. It could be anything, like Iran funding a terrorist group or something. A story like this could be easily fabricated, or it could actually happen!!


Lets also not forget this. Iran just did an interesting little thing that went pretty much unnoticed around the MSM. They discontinued the sale of oil in USD. Only Euros and Yen now. Saddam was planning on doing the same before we invaded. If more countries follow suit, it will make the dollar essentially worthless around the world, as the only reason that most countries have these absurd reserves of USD is because thats what oil is sold in.

[Iskandar]

Iran already does fund terrorist groups and they're pretty much responsible for the recent violence in Lebanon.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I wouldn't be so sure of that. A conflict doesn't mean a full scale war, it could be anything from some skirmishes on the Iraq/Iran border or out in the Persian Gulf to some bombing raids or anything in between. Keep in mind that the new administration, especially a democratic one, is going to have a somewhat free pass on their first few month of foreign policy decisions.
They won't have free pass to attack Iran, that's for sure. It's not even a remote possibility, yet already there's widespread opposition across the US and Europe. That should tell you something in itself about the viability of such a move.

Besides, Iran is Bush's obsession. I wouldn't be surprised if the entire country dropped out of the news once Bush is gone and there's nobody bothered about randomly calling them evil every time he makes a public address.

[Against Miik!]

Ha, as if McCain (who WILL win the presidency) is any different. He's already proven that he is completely incapable of understanding anything about the region, and we are still months away from the election.

You all give these guys to much credit.

[Iskandar]

McCain won't win.

[Against Miik!]

I have a feeling its already been decided.

[Iskandar]

I disagree. Once Hillary shuts up and dies, Obama will come to the forefront.

[Against Miik!]

The neocons made a rich white guy look like a jackass last time around. It's gonna get real ugly after Hillary drops out. Even if the vote is close, which it will be, it doesn't take that all that much effort to flip those results around in favor of the preferred candidate.

Believe me, I don't want McCain to win. I'm js, he probably will. There are a lot of old white people out there who have nothing better to do than vote, and there are a lot of black people out there who's votes will not be counted.

[Iskandar]

Something is wrong with America.

[TheDMV]

The more people that turn 18 between now and the general election, the better chance Obama has.

Something is wrong with America.

Politics.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Specifically? In the result of Iran taking hostile action towards Israel. That doesn't necessarily mean that Iran directly strikes Israel. It could be anything, like Iran funding a terrorist group or something. A story like this could be easily fabricated, or it could actually happen!!
Well Iran already does that and we haven't really cared up until this point.

Lets also not forget this. Iran just did an interesting little thing that went pretty much unnoticed around the MSM. They discontinued the sale of oil in USD. Only Euros and Yen now. Saddam was planning on doing the same before we invaded. If more countries follow suit, it will make the dollar essentially worthless around the world, as the only reason that most countries have these absurd reserves of USD is because thats what oil is sold in.
I don't see the Saudis and North Africans following suit, but it's a possibility I guess.

[Against Miik!]

No, the Saudis will most certainly not.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Believe me, I don't want McCain to win. I'm js, he probably will. There are a lot of old white people out there who have nothing better to do than vote, and there are a lot of black people out there who's votes will not be counted.
A lot of old white people like Obama, and it's kind of crass to paint McCain with the "old white man" stick.

[Iskandar]

It's lolful how people **** if you refer to Obama as black or Hillary as a woman, but it's open season for making cracks about McCain's age.

[TheDMV]

It's lolful how people **** if you refer to Obama as black or Hillary as a woman, but it's open season for making cracks about McCain's age.

This is very true, but while being black or a woman in no way inhibits your ability to make decisions or lead, being old could. I don't think John McCain has memory loss or would be a bad leader simply because he is old.

[Against Miik!]

A lot of old white people like Obama, and it's kind of crass to paint McCain with the "old white man" stick.

I'm sure a lot of old white people do.

There a few wild cards here though. It is questionable whether or not Obama will keep the attention of that crucial 18-25 or so demographic by the time the general election rolls around. If he does, they will be a big help in tipping the scales in his favor.

McCain will have some help too though. While on the topic of old people, I think it is safe to say that McCain will do fairly well among war vets. They make up a bigger chunk of the population than we think, especially the voting population.

McCain will also be banking on the latino vote. Remember, McCain is openly for comprehensive immigration reform, and he has, at times, put that issue in the spotlight. Like campaign finance reform (ironic, I know), it is something that he is known for. I wouldn't be surprised to see him run away with that demographic.

[TheDMV]

McCain will also be banking on the latino vote. Remember, McCain is openly for comprehensive immigration reform, and he has, at times, put that issue in the spotlight. Like campaign finance reform (ironic, I know), it is something that he is known for. I wouldn't be surprised to see him run away with that demographic.

I would be surprised. McCain used to be open to comprehensive immigration reform, but the right is getting to him. He has said that he won't be voting for his own bill. I think that could look like a change of heart. Plus, the two other candidates want comprehensive reform.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I'm sure a lot of old white people do.

There a few wild cards here though. It is questionable whether or not Obama will keep the attention of that crucial 18-25 or so demographic by the time the general election rolls around. If he does, they will be a big help in tipping the scales in his favor.
I'd wager that they will, at least in more significant numbers than they did for that stick John Kerry.

McCain will have some help too though. While on the topic of old people, I think it is safe to say that McCain will do fairly well among war vets. They make up a bigger chunk of the population than we think, especially the voting population.

McCain will also be banking on the latino vote. Remember, McCain is openly for comprehensive immigration reform, and he has, at times, put that issue in the spotlight. Like campaign finance reform (ironic, I know), it is something that he is known for. I wouldn't be surprised to see him run away with that demographic.
I'm not so sure. I don't think McCain's immigration bill is that popular among Mexicans, and I'd wager that demographic's natural instinct is still towards the Democrats.

[ringworm]

Something is wrong with America.
its because ALL the nuts go vote, hardcore

all the more rational or smart people are either disgusted, or just having too much fun to notice what politics are

seriously

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

One thing that always surprises me about American politics is how voters refer to themselves as Democrats, Republicans, or Independents. It seems like people make up their mind when they're 17 about how they'll vote for the rest of their lives and stick to it unless there's some kind of disaster.

Here (Canada) people don't lump themselves in with the parties they support, and it's not unheard of for people to vote for 3 different parties in 3 elections. It just seems to me like there's some kind of urge in American politics to label yourself before you even know what you're voting for.

[Iskandar]

I always vote NDP, but that's because their positions don't change much relative to the other parties.

[Against Miik!]

^^^ tru tru @ ftad

You guys need to remember what happend in 2000 and 04. Any states within the margain of error, regardless of who actually wins, will be given to McCain. You'd be foolish to think it will be any different this time around.

It's already happened during the primaries. Hillary did NOT win New Hampshire. In the states that she has won recently, her wins have been grossly exagerated. And in Harlem, NY? Obama got 0% of the vote. I repeat. In Harlem, Barack Obama, a black man, got 0% of the vote.

[Smokey D]

Lets also not forget this. Iran just did an interesting little thing that went pretty much unnoticed around the MSM. They discontinued the sale of oil in USD. Only Euros and Yen now. Saddam was planning on doing the same before we invaded. If more countries follow suit, it will make the dollar essentially worthless around the world, as the only reason that most countries have these absurd reserves of USD is because thats what oil is sold in.

An attack on Iran and the near inevitable embargo by OPEC members in addition to the general disorder in the region such an attack would cause far more damage to the American economy than oil producers swapping to euros. Even though most oil producers probably won't, at least not completely.

[Against Miik!]

I'm jus telling you what happend and why they did what they did. The administration was convinced before we invaded that the war would pay for itself in oil. Absolutely convinced. I think you give them to much credit.

Listen, I'm not talking about facts or what should happen or any whats right or any of that ****. I'm talking about reality, and what probably will happen.

[monetmelly]

ARE YOU SERIOUS! YOU THINK OBAMA IS GOING TO SAVE IT PLEASE! OBAMA OR WHO EVER GOING BE VOTED INTO THE WHITE IS GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH CONGRESS THATS WHAT WE NEED A ELECTION FOR NEW CONGRESS :smash:

[Smokey D]

I'm jus telling you what happend and why they did what they did. The administration was convinced before we invaded that the war would pay for itself in oil. Absolutely convinced. I think you give them to much credit.

No, you're giving us another one of your inane conspiracy theories but you fail to tell us why America hasn't gone to war with any of the other half dozen countries in the process of swapping to euros.

Listen, I'm not talking about facts

I know.

or what should happen or any whats right or any of that ****. I'm talking about reality, and what probably will happen.

What?

[Volumnius Flush]

I think we just need to march into Riyadh, kill the Royal Family and take their stinkin' oil.

[Against Miik!]

No, you're giving us another one of your inane conspiracy theories

Are you saying that the administration didn't believe that?

"Iraq is a very wealthy country. Enormous oil reserves. They can finance, largely finance the reconstruction of their own country. And I have no doubt that they will."

Richard Perle, chair
The Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
July 11, 2002

"The likely economic effects [of a war in Iraq] would be relatively small.... Under every plausible scenario, the negative effect will be quite small relative to the economic benefits."

Lawrence Lindsey
White House economic adviser
September 16, 2002

"It is unimaginable that the United States would have to contribute hundreds of billions of dollars and highly unlikely that we would have to contribute even tens of billions of dollars."

Kenneth Pollack
former director for Persian Gulf affairs
National Security Council
September 2002

"The costs of any intervention would be very small."

Glenn Hubbard
White House economic adviser
October 4, 2002

"Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction."

Ari Fleischer
White House press secretary
February 18, 2003

"When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community."

Donald Rumsfeld
Secretary of Defense
March 27, 2003

"There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be US taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people. We are talking about a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon."

Paul Wolfowitz
Deputy Secretary of Defense
testifying before the defense subcommittee
of the House Appropriations Committee
March 27, 2003

"The United States is very committed to helping Iraq recover from the conflict, but Iraq will not require sustained aid."

Mitchell Daniels, director
White House Office of Management and Budget
April 21, 2003

"The allies [have contributed] $14 billion in direct aid."

Dick Cheney
vice presidential debate with
Democratic candidate John Edwards
October 5, 2004

Again, you overestimate the minds in Washington. Hey, maybe you should run for president, since apparently you know whats up.

The ENTIRE situation is about keeping the dollar as the dominant world currency. In 1971, a secret agreement was made between the U.S. and OPEC to sell only in US dollars. The countries who have challenged this are Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela. We saw what happend with Iraq. The US has been pushing for a coup in Venezuela, and if you deny that the US isn't crafting plans for some sort of intervention in Iran (perhaps not a full on invasion, but something), then you are just ignorant.

[Smokey D]

I have no doubt Iraq's oil wealth played into the decision to go war. I would even go as far to say it was probably a motivating factor.

But Iraq's decision to swap from dollars to Euro's was considerably less relevant.

[Against Miik!]

So you think its a coincidence that the two event coincided, and that the same thing is now happening w/ Iran? Why else are we making up lies about Iran arming Iraqi militants? Because they are brown? I highly doubt that.

[Smokey D]

No one's lying about Iran arming Iraqis. It's pretty clear that there are ties between Tehran and Shi'a militas.

The thing you've failed to observe is that the countries swapping to petroeuros is are engaged in a broader foreign policy clash with the USA and that the US has problems with most of those regimes regardless of how they're denominating their oil sales.

he US has been pushing for a coup in Venezuela, and if you deny that the US isn't crafting plans for some sort of intervention in Iran (perhaps not a full on invasion, but something), then you are just ignorant.

Only if a) McCain wins the nomination or b) Iran does something completely retarded like bombing Tel Aviv.

I don't doubt that if the US could get away with preserving the dollar as the sole currency in which oil and gas are denominated it would do something, but the fact is that it can no longer do that.

[Against Miik!]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html

Actually, its been proven that the US has failed to find a link between Iran and the weapons in Iran.

Also, it would make little sense that Iran is causing any problem in Iraq, since Iran is predominately Shia, and the issues in Iraq are stemming from the former Sunni regime.

[Smokey D]

Well, there has been a ceasefire between Shi'a groups and everybody else for the last year and a half so obviously there's less of an issue there but there are almost certainly links between the Mahdi Army and Iran. Now that the ceasefire has effectively ended, that might change.

[Iskandar]

It would be in Iran's interest to fund Shi'a militia groups because Iran is a Shi'a theocracy.
Also, it would make little sense that Iran is causing any problem in Iraq, since Iran is predominately Shia, and the issues in Iraq are stemming from the former Sunni regime.Yes, which dominated over the Shi'a majority.

[Independent_CA]

Also, it would make little sense that Iran is causing any problem in Iraq, since Iran is predominately Shia, and the issues in Iraq are stemming from the former Sunni regime.
It actually makes perfect sense.

Not that I'm saying we should go to war with them, we should let the Iraqis deal with it.