[tomder55]

Here is the amazing reaction by the MSNBC punsters after the President's Oval office address yesterday :

Olbermann: “It was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days.”


Olbermann: “Nothing specific at all was said.”

Matthews: “No direction.”

Howard Fineman: “He wasn’t specific enough.”

Olbermann: “I don’t think he aimed low, I don’t think he aimed at all. It’s startling.”

Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a “commander-in-chief.”

Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying Secretary of Energy Chu has a Nobel prize. “I’ll barf if he does it one more time.”

Matthews: “A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk.”

Matthews: “I don’t sense executive command.”


RealClearPolitics - Video - MSNBC Trashes Obama's Address: Compared To Carter, "I Don't Sense Executive Command"

[excon]

Hello:

Yup, when you lose Cronkite, I mean Mathews, it's over. (Not that Mathews is any Walter Cronkite.)

He lost me a long time ago when he became Bush on steroids. Consider the claims of Maher Arar, an innocent Canadian who was sent to Syria to be tortured in 2002.

excon

PS> (edited) To those who don't know, when Walter Cronkite announced on the evening news, that he had turned against the Vietnam war, President Johnson KNEW the war was lost. He said as much in his memoirs.

[tomder55]

He's as innocent as Mumia Abu-Jamal ,and no doubt destined to become the next celebrity .

What this has to do with the lack of leadership in the Gulf oil crisis is beyond me .However ,the NY Slimes of course leaves out some important details in their attempt to create a celebrity victim to the rendition system that Bill Clintoon initiated.

Has anyone proven torture in the Arar case ;or is it assumed that because he said it happened it did ?

The Arar commission worked under that assumption ,but did nothing to confirm it. No medical evidence was presented .No doctor testified to the fact. Arar never testified ;nor cross examined during the hearing .

When asked about torture he complained about being held in a small cell to the Canadian consular officials who visited him. The Canadians who visited him saw no signs of physical abuse(a total of nine consular visits during his 10 month imprisonment ).

He now talks of physical beatings with 2 inch electric cable that left him bruised for weeks at a time. All the consular reports were made public at the Arar commission. No signs of physical abuse were ever observed. Even after Arar was released, he did not speak of beatings.

If he was wrongly imprisoned he deserves compensation from the people who fingered him... the Canadians . And that is what happened to the tune of $10.5 million .
His confession to the Syrians of travelling to Pakistan and Afghanistan in 1993 for training have to be disregarded even though it is probably true.

But when asked to provide any proof that he was anywhere else at that time ,he can't or won't produce it. It of course is the burden of the accuser to produce the evidence . But his not producing it leaves open the question .

Surely you and the Slimes aren't saying that there should be a "price to pay for torture " when no evidence of torture was ever produced?
...
Did you watch the President's address ? He actually seemed disinterested to me except when threatening BP and then moving on to his larger agenda. (no crisis wasted )

In typical Obama style he built a strawman and knocked it down.

But the one approach I will not accept is inaction. The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that this challenge is too big and too difficult to meet. You know, the same thing was said about our ability to produce enough planes and tanks in World War II. The same thing was said about our ability to harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon. And yet, time and again, we have refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is our capacity to shape our destiny — our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we're unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don't yet know precisely how we're going to get there. We know we'll get there.

Building planes and tanks ;and even knowing how to get to the moon was on the table before the decision was made. It's not like there is some flux capasitor design sitting at Los Alamos or a powerplant engine fueled by dilithium crystals. All the known so- called clean alternate energies fully employed would not put a dent into our immediate energy needs ;let alone the US and world future needs.

But that won't stop him from forging ahead . He won't accept the “paltry limits of conventional wisdom.” ....“Seize control of our own destiny" ...“Accelerate the transition.” ....Then he got to the point .

“The days of cheap oil are numbered.”..."There are costs associated with this transition.”
(another strawman moment )
there are some who believe that we can't afford those costs right now. I say we can't afford not to change how we produce and use energy, because the long-term costs to our economy, our national security and our environment are far greater.

There in a nutshell was the point of the address. It had nothing to do with the steps he would take to plug the leak ,contain the spill or clean it up .It had everything to do with his agenda. If I was a tin-foil hat type of person I would swear it's just too convenient for this to have happened almost immediately after he had approved drilling (A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe, that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken.)

The obvious conclusion then is that no amt of drilling is safe so it will be taken off the table.

But the future he promises is a big unknown mostly found in the pages of science fiction novels .If he knows how to get there from here he is mum about the details .

Meanwhile the leak continues and grows while he threatens BP with the death sentence.

[paraclete]

So you guys got another yes we can speech and you want the details and of course an immediate result. You haven't actually emerged from the details of the last yes we can speech, and you expect details?

If Obama has pulled the plug on deep water oil drilling, good. Now you will get on with developing fuel efficient vehicles

[cdad]

so you guys got another yes we can speech and you want the details and of course an immediate result. You haven't actually emerged from the details of the last yes we can speech, and you expect details?

If Obama has pulled the plug on deep water oil drilling, good. Now you will get on with developing fuel efficient vehicles

If that were the only thing. We have fuel efficient cars and trucks. The biggest problem is the goobermint and the EPA keep telling car makers how to make cars and not let them loose to give people what they want. There is so much out there that is being kept hidden its just a pure shame.

[paraclete]

If that were the only thing. We have fuel efficient cars and trucks. The biggest problem is the goobermint and the EPA keep telling car makers how to make cars and not let them loose to give people what they want. There is so much out there that is being kept hidden its just a pure shame.

You don't really have fuel efficient cars and trucks there is much more that can be done but car makers will only make the costly changes when they are forced to do it. The days of the car industry being consumer driven are gone and consumers will want cars that are cheaper to run so the car makers should be leading

[cdad]

You don't really have fuel efficient cars and trucks there is much more that can be done but car makers will only make the costly changes when they are forced to do it. The days of the car industry being consumer driven are gone and consumers will want cars that are cheaper to run so the car makers should be leading

The problem is with the EPA telling the car companies to meet certain very old and outdated standards. Its included in every car sold. That would be the smog controls. Also they have set standards for electric cars. That's why you don't see them going over 100 miles without a charge. Its all just a big scam. They could do so much more but are being prevented from doing so.

[tomder55]

The big lie was that deep water drilling was happening because there were no more reserves to tap in shallow waters or land.

"We consume more than 20% of the world's oil, but have less than 2% of the world's oil reserve. And that's part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean -- because we're running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water."

The truth is that deep water drilling is happening because the government refuses to allow the tapping of the easier reserves .
The U.S.' Untapped Oil Bounty - Kiplinger

By all means move towards that bright future of the day when abundant carbon free energy can be produced . Until then drill baby drill.

[paraclete]

The big lie was that deep water drilling was happening because there were no more reserves to tap in shallow waters or land.


.

There are lots of big lies around. Peak oil is a big lie, climate change is a big lie, oil flow in the Gulf of Mexico has been a big lie, the reasons for being in Afghanistan might prove to be a big lie, the June offensive appears to have been a big lie but the biggest lie of all is regulation is bad.

[tomder55]

I keep on hearing this claim here as if regulations in themselves are some kind of panacea . First ;again ,we do not speak in absolutes about regulation and you have not heard from me make a blanket statement suggesting that government safety regulations are a bad thing.

But ;would you agree that there is no more regulated place in the world right now than China ? Has that prevented industrial accidents ?
China nuclear power plant leak exposed - UPI.com

For every case you can make for lack of regulation I can make a case that regulators asleep at the wheel ,bureaucratic inertia ,outright corruption,or poor public policy was equally a contributing factor in any of the related issues be it this spill ;or the financial collapse .

[excon]

But ;would you agree that there is no more regulated place in the world right now than China ? Has that prevented industrial accidents ?

Hello tom:

Spoken like a true believer in the adage, "Government IS the problem". Contrary to your misguided statement, there are regulators out there who do DO their jobs, and THAT regulation DOES prevent industrial accidents...

excon

[paraclete]

But ;would you agree that there is no more regulated place in the world right now than China ? Has that prevented industrial accidents ?

For every case you can make for lack of regulation I can make a case that regulators asleep at the wheel ,bureaucratic inertia ,outright corruption,or poor public policy was equally a contributing factor in any of the related issues be it this spill ;or the financial collapse .

There is nothing like duck shoving the issue and forget China, if you don't do your job there you disappear, which would be a good remedy to implement in the US. You don't enforce the regulations because it is not politically convenient to do so. This is why you have forty million illegals in the US, this is why you have millions of gallons of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, this is why you caused the GFC. Don't blame the bureaucrats put the blame where it lies, the man at the top took responsibility, so you will have an opportunity soon to tell him what you think

[tomder55]

Hello tom:

Spoken like a true believer in the adage, "Government IS the problem". Contrary to your misguided statement, there are regulators out there who do DO their jobs, and THAT regulation DOES prevent industrial accidents....

excon

The Europeans swim in financial regulations . How's that working for them ?

The truth is that there are mountains of regulations regarding off shore drilling .

Here is the truth . The week before the blowout BP knew it was going to cut corners because they were 40 days late and were paying a half million dollars a day to use the rig .

So they went to regulators at the Obama Minerals Management Service with 3 changes to their permit. The regulators approved the changes within minutes of the submissions without doing any real review of the changes.

BP took the short cuts and the regulators approved them . Are you saying government wasn't part of the problem ? Again ,I never said regulations aren't necessary. But they aren't the panacea people think they are.

[excon]

BP took the short cuts and the regulators approved them . Are you saying government wasn't part of the problem ?

Hello again, tom:

Tom, you've been drinking right wing koolaid again. You might have seen on your local news, a Seattle cop slugging a 17 year old girl. Using your logic, I COULD say that the police are the problem, instead of saying this ONE cop is the problem...

THESE BUSH and OBAMA regulators DIDN'T do their jobs. That doesn't mean government IS part of the problem. I understand, though. For a guy who believes government IS the problem, it ain't much of a leap.

excon

[tomder55]

Don't blame the bureaucrats put the blame where it lies, the man at the top took responsibility,

Did that in the OP

[speechlesstx]

Here's another big lie, Lurch claims that subsidizing alternative energy is some sort of job creating miracle:

“We just told you that every study that has been made says that this creates hundreds of thousands of jobs a year.”

Kerry can tell you about the studies, but just like the legislation Democrats pass, apparently doesn't actually read them.

Except for when it doesn't...

Job Losses From Obama Green Stimulus Foreseen in Spanish Study

The premiums paid for solar, biomass, wave and wind power - - which are charged to consumers in their bills -- translated into a $774,000 cost for each Spanish “green job” created since 2000, said Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor at the university and author of the report.

“The loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices,” he said in an interview.

"Green Jobs" In Germany

While employment projections in the renewable sector convey seemingly impressive prospects for gross job growth, they typically obscure the broader implications for economic welfare by omitting any accounting of off-setting impacts. These impacts include, but are not limited to, job losses from crowding out of cheaper forms of conventional energy generation, indirect impacts on upstream industries, additional job losses from the drain on economic activity precipitated by higher electricity prices, private consumers' overall loss of purchasing power due to higher electricity prices, and diverting funds from other, possibly more beneficial investment.

WIND ENERGY, THE CASE OF DENMARK

The Danish Wind industry counts 28,400 employees. This does not, however, constitute the net employment effect of the wind mill subsidy. In the long run, creating additional employment in one sector through subsidies will detract labor from other sectors, resulting in no increase in net employment but only in a shift from the non-subsidized sectors to the subsidized sector.

Allowing for the theoretical possibility of wind employment alleviating possible regional pockets of high unemployment, a very optimistic ballpark estimate of net real job creation is 10% of total employment in the sector. In this case the subsidy per job created is 600,000-
900,000 DKK per year ($90,000-140,000). This subsidy constitutes around 175-250% of the average pay per worker in the Danish manufacturing industry.

In terms of value added per employee, the energy technology sector over the period 1999-2006 underperformed by as much as 13% compared with the industrial average.

This implies that the effect of the government subsidy has been to shift employment from more productive employment in other sectors to less productive employment in the wind industry.

As a consequence, Danish GDP is approximately 1.8 billion DKK ($270 million) lower than it would have been if the wind sector work force was employed elsewhere.

So, every study doesn't say subsidizing alternative energy creates jobs. That would be "green jobs," whatever that is.

Billions for 'green jobs,' whatever they are

[excon]

Hello again, wrongwingers:

Here's the deal. Oil is finite. We ARE going to run out. Consequently, the oil companies WILL be out of business at SOME time in the future, and we WILL develop alternative energy sources, or our way of life is over.

Those are the undeniable and irrefutable facts.

So, we can start down that road NOW, or we can pretend that the future isn't really going to happen, which is what you wingers are doing. Guess what??

Now, I agree that we don't have the technology NOW, but it seems to me, that the government COULD stimulate development IF it offered subsidies, tax credits, deductions and any other incentive's to start moving in that direction.

You? Not so much.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Now, I agree that we don't have the technology NOW, but it seems to me, that the government COULD stimulate development IF it offered subsidies, tax credits, deductions and any other incentive's to start moving in that direction.

You? Not so much.

And again you misrepresent us wingers. I'm not against alternative energy, I'm tired of the lies.

[NeedKarma]

I'm tired of the lies.

Imagine how WE feel! :)

[speechlesstx]

Imagine how WE feel! :)

No thanks.