McCain / Lieberman?

Reading this item at TPM via Roll Call, Senator Lieberman looks to be doing two things: He is burning his bridges with the Democrat Party; and he is already acting like a VP candidate - playing the attack dog.

Yesterday, the news was McCain wants to go after former Hillary supporters. Can you think of a better way to do that, while also completely stealing Obama's change / healing / uniter thunderstorm than by selecting a recent but now former Democrat to accomplish all that?

They don't call him a maverick for nothing, after all. And while it wouldn't help him with conservatives, if he is intent on winning from the center, it's hard to conceive of a better choice. Well, I suppose he could pick Hillary, but I suspect she has plans for 2012, if not before.

Furthermore, during a Senate vote Wednesday, Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation.
While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating.

Using forceful, but not angry, hand gestures, Obama literally backed up Lieberman against the wall, leaned in very close at times, and appeared to be trying to dominate the conversation, as the two talked over each other in a few instances.

Still, Obama and Lieberman seemed to be trying to keep the back-and-forth congenial as they both patted each other on the back during and after the exchange.

Afterwards, Obama smiled and pointed up at reporters peering over the edge of the press gallery for a better glimpse of their interaction.

Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus.

Comments

[Daryl Herbert]

Dems are not afraid to take on Lieberman because they expect to have a safe majority in the Senate come this fall.

[bc]

Before He smites our asses for picking such a feckless bunch of Republican legislators, God is giving us one last chance to do the right thing and pick Sarah Palin as veep. If we do, He'll kill off McCain in the first year, and the country will be saved. If we pick another old guy, well, don't say I didn't warn you.

[seekeronos]

jharp:
"--- Liberals are not racist. Lets' be clear on that. ---"

Of course you aren't. Except of course, if you happen to be a white male liberal, in which case you've got eternal reparations to make for the sins of your evil forefathers who pillaged the land of First Nations (Native Americans), enslaved Africans, and then deprived their descendants for several generations.

And even if Obama wins, that still won't get you off the hook for a 500 years of oppression of the brown people, now will it?

Tom:
"--- Liberals may not be racist, but Leftists certainly are, and the commenters here are Leftists. ---"

Tom lays down the pwnage.

It's a fact: many of the leftists posting on this board have made some pretty nasty and racist comments, especially a certain trool* whose comments we always wait with bated breath for.

*Trool: a troll who is also a tool.

I also think that a great many self-described "liberals" are pretty far to the left.

Libertarians and conservatives - especially constitutional conservatives - tend to be least likely in my experience to be racist... and at the very least, they are rather much more concerned with making a better life for themselves, their families, and their communities to fuss about how great they are for supporting the "black candidate" as a proof of how "non-racist" they are.

It's almost as if the "white guilt" has fueled the entire Obama campaign - and certainly far out of proportion to the 90% of the 12% African American voting bloc that supported him simply on account of his party affiliation and skin colour (in that order)... and if the Dems tried any harder at backslapping each other over Obama's (presumptive) nomination, they'd break their elbows.

Obama has proven quite to the contrary that we haven't "gotten over racism" since we seem to spend waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time indulging in a sort of a mental onanism over how great we are for (s)electing a black presidential nominee.

[seekeronos]

BC:

That item about Sarah Palin is gold. I'd almost be tempted to re-consider McCain if he picks Gov. Palin.

Or Gov. Jodi Rell.

While neither are "Ron Paul Conservatives" (being a little bit liberal on LGBT issues), they both meet the "diversity" test, the "right of McCain" test, the "gubernatorial experience" test, and the compliment McCain's strengths test.

Certainly both of these two women should be near the top of any short list for McCain's VP choices.

My gut feeling is still that he will pick either Jindal or Pawlenty.

[bobInStamford]

Heavens, what a VIBRANT ticket you patriots are putting together. An angry senior citizen and perhaps some Joementum or a woman from Alaska?!

Incidently, your stammering leader lied to you.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/05/senate.iraq/index.html

Now go fill up your tanks.

Semper Fi!

[Fred Beloit]

Obama has said "white folks' greed run a world in need". Really. You can hear him say it at Gateway Pundit:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/obama-talks-to-reporters-about-whitey.html

[seekeronos]

Yup, this general election is gonna be made ALL about race.

And most of it by the Obama camp. Marxist divisiveness and class/race warfare all the way.

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo say: "Your math is correct but that wasn't Yglesias point. The point he was trying to make was 30% think 2 or more years is fine. And McCain is one of them. And I can't see what the problem with that is."

You misunderstand what Yggie is saying, Li'l Abner. I will quote again:

"Here's CBS's poll on how long Americans would like to see our troops stay in Iraq. John McCain's supporters can try to spin his 100 years remark any way they'd like, but it's clear enough that McCain's one of the thirty percent who think longer than two years is acceptable."

Read this as anything but "McCain is among only 30% of the population who won't put a maximum of two years on the war effort in Iraq" and you can't read.

[joeb]

Americans are such cockeyed optimists. Obama is the first black Bill Clinton.

[Fred Beloit]

Oh, Boob, I do feel bad for you. It is your leaders who are lying to you with the just-released report written and severely edited by Dem staffers. Go to Flopping Aces for the truth, Boob, my very good, but now sad, friend.

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

In October 2001, we picked up warnings that terrorists had acquired a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb. If detonated in New York City, hundreds of thousands of Americans would have died, and most of Manhattan would have been destroyed. Sam Nunn had an important warning, “This intelligence report was judged to be false. But it was never judged to be implausible or impossible.”
-Sen. John Kerry 1/23/03

"[note: none of the above pre-war intelligence claims about Saddam's regime were examined in the Senate Intelligence Committee's reports. They were removed from the final "comments" report after Democrats took control of the Senate and the committee two years ago]"

[ch]

I think old man McSame has gone over the edge

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DqR7zis99I

Ummm.....

[chris]

A correction for you luddites/neo-whigs. Calling you 28%ers was inaccurate and unfair. I apologize.

http://pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Oh, Boob, I do feel bad for you. It is your leaders who are lying to you with the just-released report written and severely edited by Dem staffers. Go to Flopping Aces for the truth, Boob, my very good, but now sad, friend. --"

Yes, its a cute game. After 9/11, Bush comes running to the Congress crying about how Saddam has WMDs and the CIA has lots of proof. Colin Powell puts on his dog-and-pony show in front of the UN. We rush off to war. And then the Senate sits down to compile the report - a report that Pat Robertson, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, sits on for four years straight.

Highlights:

"--
--Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.

--Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

--Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

--Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community's uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

--The Secretary of Defense's statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

--The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.
--"

It's a fun game to play. The President lies to the Senate. The Senate passes those lies to the people. Ergo, the Senate is to blame - VOTE REPUBLICAN!

The President goads the nation into war. The Senate approves the plan with a number of Democratic defectors making a filibuster impossible. The war is an absolute disaster. Ergo, the Democrats are to blame - VOTE REPUBLICAN!

Budget is a mess for seven years running, with hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a needless war. Meanwhile, the Justice Department is riddled with corrupt and incompetent lawyers hired from fourth tier colleges run by major Republican donors. Bridges collapse and highways fall into disrepair while Senator Ted Stevens gets his own $250 million dollar pork project. But the Democrats didn't fight hard enough to stop it - VOTE REPUBLICAN!

Do you realize how incredibly daft you sound?

There will be two options on the ballot in November. Liberal or Bush. People aren't afraid to pick the liberals anymore.

[IslamoLlama]

Link
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/198873.php

[jharp]

What am I missing here Fred? The three statements below clearly mean the same thing.

Harpo say: The point he was trying to make was 30% think 2 or more years is fine. And McCain is one of them.

You misunderstand what Yggie is saying, Li'l Abner. I will quote again:

"Here's CBS's poll on how long Americans would like to see our troops stay ... ...it's clear enough that McCain's one of the thirty percent who think longer than two years is acceptable."

Read this as anything but "McCain is among only 30% of the population who won't put a maximum of two years on the war effort in Iraq" and you can't read.

You said. ... Here is what the poll really says:
51 % of Americans would like our troops to stay in Iraq from up to 1 or 2 years to as long as it takes."

Though a true statement it was not the point Yglesia was making.

Boy oh boy, Fred. You really nailed Yglesia with that one.

[Malfunctioning Wingnut Robot]

ZOMG Obama didn't deny that he is a an atheist, homosexual, Muslim, black suppremecist, Marxist, Nazi, Stalinist!! There's totally a tape out there proving garble babble purple monkey telephone!!! The absence of this tape is central to my point and only makes it stronger. John KErry hates teh tr000pz! Jamil Hussein. Teh surge is working!!! MSM. Drive by media. Leftists. SUpport teh trr000pz (the ones that dont speak out against the war - you know, the NON phony soldiers)!

[Sandra Mendoza]

Two Democrats on a Republican ticket? I don't think so.

My choice is Bobby Jindal who is everything Obama seems to be.

And the Obama scandals keep on coming

3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he
was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has
Ever had.

4.) “My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom” - NOT EXACTLY,
your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting
to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first
widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American
but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your
half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga’s follower. You interrupted your
New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out
the following link for verification of that….and for more.
Obama’s cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and
tried to get Sharia Muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the
elections, his followers have burned Christians’ homes and then burned
men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took
shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here
started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth.

.....

6.) “My Name is African Swahili” - NOT EXACTLY, your name is
Arabic and ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means
‘blessed’ in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.

For more, read OBAMA'S LIES a comment by Dean on Jun 4 5:26 am to a column by Rick Moran on McCain-Obama on Pajamas Media.

[Fred Beloit]

I can lead a horses a-- to water, Harpo, but I can't make it...well you know the rest.

[Fred Beloit]

"We rush off to war."

Hahha. Yes we rushed off to war, after 17 UN resolutions.
9/11/2001---World Trade Center Suicidal Attack
3/30/2003---Start of present Iraq operations.
We "rushed" to war in about 18 months. Oh, Lamemoe. You are a kidder.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- We "rushed" to war in about 18 months. --"

We had to invade Afghanistan first, so that we could fail to capture Osama Bin Laden. That was definitely a drag on the attack. I'm more referring to Bush, Condi, Cheney, et al starting the drum beat about chemical missiles and mushroom clouds. Those didn't really start until September 2002.

I'd consider a six month drum beat leading into a massive military invasion something of a rush, given that we went in claiming we knew exactly where the WMDs were located only to turn up no roving chemical labs, no Nigerian yellow cake, and no 9/11 connection.

[Fred Beloit]

Moe, you are of course a liar: "The President lies to the Senate." There is zero evidence of this. This is typical of the Leftists. You report as fact something you only hope, against all evidence, is true. Clinton as president believed the same as Bush. YOU HAVE ADMITTED THIS. There is a video tape.

On what occasions did Bush meet with Gore, Kerry, Hillary, and Rockefeller and lie to them about WMD? And was Bush still governor of Texas when he somehow lied to Bill Clinton while Clinton was president in 1998? That was truly a remarkable feat.

Moe, you have no shame, no honor. I'm finished trying to discus issues with a liar, and such a lame one at that.

[Fred Beloit]

Moe, you are of course a liar: "The President lies to the Senate." There is zero evidence of this. This is typical of the Leftists. You report as fact something you only hope, against all evidence, is true. Clinton as president believed the same as Bush. YOU HAVE ADMITTED THIS. There is a video tape.

On what occasions did Bush meet with Gore, Kerry, Hillary, and Rockefeller and lie to them about WMD? And was Bush still governor of Texas when he somehow lied to Bill Clinton while Clinton was president in 1998? That was truly a remarkable feat.

Moe, you have no shame, no honor. I'm finished trying to discus issues with a liar, and such a lame one at that.

[Southern Values]

After all these years it’s still Clinton’s fault. That’s always a good one.

Keep the simple drumbeat going about Bush and Republican party – Corrupt and/or Incompetent. Corrupt and/or Incompetent. If the American public is truly uninterested in the principal political matters that has so badly affected their lives – we need that bumper sticker tag line : Corrupt and/or Incompetent. Every thing this Administration has done has been Corrupt and/or Incompetent.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Moe, you are of course a liar: "The President lies to the Senate." There is zero evidence of this. --"

WOW! Learn. To. Read.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/198873.php

--Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.

--Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

--Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

--Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community's uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

--The Secretary of Defense's statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

--The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

Oh, but the President didn't lie! The President didn't lie! He just misinformed himself, and then others. Democrats didn't have the sheer willful ignorance to defend Clinton like this. I guess we've got one more reminder of whose holding the moral high ground in this country.

[Southern Values]

Pretty much either corrupt or incompetent. Some times you can take your pick.

[jharp]

I really wonder how far the 25% ers can go with their blindness over the corrupt and incompetent GWB.

Do you suppose if W stood in front of a camera and admitted he lied about the intelligence in order to justify attacking Iraq they'd finally come clean.

I'm not so sure. I think they might blame the confession on Clinton.

[jharp]

Oh, and good work on the economy, W.

Oil is now $139 per barrel. Bank failures are on the way.

Get ready taxpayers. The mother of all bailouts coming soon.

We are so fucked. And 25% still support this administrations policies.

Unbelievable!

[seekeronos]

"--- Oh, and good work on the economy, W.

Oil is now $139 per barrel. Bank failures are on the way.

Get ready taxpayers. The mother of all bailouts coming soon.

We are so xxxxed. And 25% still support this administrations policies.

Unbelievable! ---"

Heh. My energy-based ETFs will be enjoying this nice little shot in the arm. At the very least, it'll make the winter heating season a little less painful.

This commodities bubble shall be most interesting, as the seems to be no end in sight (though common sense dictates that there will be an end to this bull some time down the road).

And to offset any bank failures, I'd strongly creeping any liquid assets over to silver and gold.

[jharp]

"And to offset any bank failures, I'd strongly creeping any liquid assets over to silver and gold."

Interesting take. I disagree. What is one to do with gold and silver?

You can't eat it, heat your home with it, use it to power your car, nor use it as medicine. About the only thing you can do with it is sell it someone else or wear it.

And how about this idea? Throw the most incompetent corrupt party in U.S. history out of office. And most of the saner Americans know many of them belong in jail.

Does Jesus teach that when your leaders are corrupt and have destroyed the well being of the people to hoard as much as you can for yourself to weather the tough times?

[Southern Values]

The more I learn of the malfeasance of this Administration, and an interesting side discussion is the amount there is to learn; I sometimes get to a point of malfeasance overload. At these times, I go to the blogs and purge myself of my knowledge demons.

What do you wingers do besides restocking the basement full of food and guns?

[jharp]

Oil Gushes Higher by More Than $11 to Record $139.12- AP

Oil prices have shot up more than $11 to a new record above $139 a barrel after a Morgan Stanley analyst predicted prices could hit $150 by the Fourth of July. Traders were also rattled by rising tensions in the Middle East.

* Jobs Data, Oil Crush Stocks, Dow Plunges 370 Pts- AP
* Unemployment Rate: Biggest Monthly Rise in 22 Years

Great work. GOP.

[Tom]

Jharp further proves that Democrats cannot attract the votes of people with high or even average IQ.

Bush did not lie to start the war. It is Homocrats who lie about *that*.

Unemployment rate over Bush's 7 years : 5.0%
Unemployment rate over Clinton's 8 years : 5.2%.

From www.bls.gov.

Oil prices are high because of Bush? I knew that economic illiteracy was a prerequisite for being a Homocrat, but this is absurd. Will oil prices drop if BHO wins? Are you willing to bet?

No wonder the GOP has won 7 of the last 10 Presidential elections, and 5 of the last 7. There are still enough intelligent people in the US so far.

[jharp]

Correction.

Dow loses 407 points.

And Tom are you too dam dumb to understand the unemployment numbers or are you just plain dishonest?

And yes, oil prices are high because of Bush.

You know, as in destruction of the value of the US dollar, invasion of Iraq, and tax advantages encouraging gas guzzlers.

Why do suppose Bush has a 25% approval rating?

[joeb]

A happy American is an American with a full tank of gas. When it gets to 8 or 9 dollars a gallon like it is in Europe right now then we will see some major changes in lifestyles. More bikes, more walking, more public transportation, more scooters. Adapt and adjust will be the name of the game.
Forget putting your money in silver and gold. Put all your money in whiskey sours.

[Southern Values]

Tom – still not sure what that Homocrats title is all about. Moving past the statistical rollup of unemployment, the real issue is job creation and it that area Bush’s record has been abysmal. That falls under the category of incompetent.

The significant issue facing the cost of oil is the current valuation of the dollar. This is a direct result of Bush’s economic policies. Not being an economist, I’m not sure if this is corruption or incompetence.

[jharp]

Good work W. This is direct result of us empowering Iran through the invasion of Iraq.

"Comments by Israel’s transportation minister on Friday that an attack on Iranian nuclear sites looked “unavoidable” also sent investors into a frenzy."

"Also?"You think? Effing Einstein, no doubt.

You don't think that in itself wouldn't drive oil up? Possible fears of Iranian oil being pulled off the market just to spite the West? Hell, they've done it before. Silly business reporters.

Updated: Bloomberg gets it largely correct: "``The Iranian risk premium which had left the market for some time is likely to return and hover over the market in the next few weeks,'' said Antoine Halff, head of energy research at Newedge USA LLC in New York. ``The knee jerk reaction to the comments by Mofaz will wear off quickly because Israel would not broadcast its intention in this fashion.''" And yet the risk premium in this case is still very real.

[BobInStamford]

"Heh. My energy-based ETFs will be enjoying this nice little shot in the arm. At the very least, it'll make the winter heating season a little less painful."

Settle down there Rockefeller. Aren't you the same chump who can't afford to drive to Jersey for groceries> Be lucky that you have your crappy gubment job.

[seekeronos]

jharp:

"--- Interesting take. I disagree. What is one to do with gold and silver?

You can't eat it, heat your home with it, use it to power your car, nor use it as medicine. About the only thing you can do with it is sell it someone else or wear it. ---"

Au contraire! When the markets start to tank, along with a crumbling dollar, gold, and particularly silver, will become more attractive as a reserve, rather, a store of value.

It may even become valuable once again as a species of exchange should consumer faith in the fiat dollar completely collapse.

Therefore, while I hope that my dollar denominated assets will prosper and that the dollar will recover its strength, I'll do as good to keep a greater part of my portfolio in gold or silver. And if I need to exchange some of that gold and silver for energy assets, I just might have more buying power per unit of gold and silver than someone else might with just a worthless fiat FRN (Federal Reserve Note - a US dollar).

"--- And how about this idea? Throw the most incompetent corrupt party in U.S. history out of office. And most of the saner Americans know many of them belong in jail. ---"

Amen! I'd be thrilled to see a slate of Ron Paul Republicans or Constitutionalists replace the feckless fattened compromising (R)s and elitist (D)s in Congress.

I do not place much stock in the ability of a left-wing government which seeks to expand its control over every detail of my life to do much good for me.

"--- Does Jesus teach that when your leaders are corrupt and have destroyed the well being of the people to hoard as much as you can for yourself to weather the tough times? ---"

Jesus taught me to pray for my leaders, and intercede for them, and wherever their laws are not in contradiction to God's Word, to obey them. When they become corrupt, I trust in my sovereign and perfect God to judge righteously, and for those righteous and God-fearing countrymen of mine to work toward voting in someone who will do the will of the Lord.

"Hoarding", as you put it, depends on the scope. If it is securing the needs of my family, then I am Biblically correct, for 1 Timothy 5:8 (KJV) says:

"----- But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. -----"

I also have an obligation to see that the needs of my local church are provided for, as they exist, and then other Christians whom the Lord directs to me, as well as unbelievers; but my family comes first.

And lest I forget (though I should not really need to say this) acquiring more ammo and making sure your weapons are in good repair won't hurt either.

[Southern Values]

I was wondering what the “risk” cost or percentage existed in the price of crude oil.
This article http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4962032/
claims is was 25% in 2004 ( and it bitches about how oil is stubborn by staying above $40 / barrel )

What is the percentage cost today? Is it 25%? That additional cost to fill up your truck is due to your Leader’s Most Exhalant MidEast Adventure. That’s got to make you proud.

[seekeronos]

"--- ...a new record above $139 a barrel after a Morgan Stanley analyst predicted prices could hit $150 by the Fourth of July. ---"

I fully expect oil to hit $150/Bbl in less than _two weeks_, if even that long.

I will be surprised if oil doesn't hit $160/Bbl by July 4th, and $200/Bbl by Labour Day, though things might cool off a little bit by then with a decreased demand taking a much expected big bite.

"--- Will oil prices drop if BHO wins? Are you willing to bet? ---"

It has much more to do with a weak dollar, as a direct result of our unconstitutional war, as well as the sub-prime loan/real estate collapse (which is far milder than I initially projected about two years ago).

Oil is denominated in $USD, which has fallen nearly 40% in value against the market basket of currencies used by the G10 nations.

This makes life a scad easier for the Europeans (who already pay stifling taxes on their oil), who paying substantially less per barrel. Of course, if the Iraqis under Saddam and the Iranians had had their way, we'd be paying in very expensive Euros now, though I believe the dollar depreciation would not have been so bad without a war.

Oil will go up regardless of who wins in November. I believe that Obama will make them go up in a way that will not be fun for anyone, least of all oil companies and their investors.

If McCain wins, I think prices will creep up more slowly, but with less adverse effect on the markets.

"--- Settle down there Rockefeller. Aren't you the same chump who can't afford to drive to Jersey for groceries> Be lucky that you have your crappy gubment job. ---"

Thanks for your concern, Bob the Trool.

Actually, I am scaling back by longer range driving and unnecessary driving, but that has more to do with me liking to save money where ever I can.

And I am thankful for my job... it might not make me rich enough to drive a couple of Beemer SUVs all over Creation, but I am less likely to get it in the neck with unemployment creeping up.

[Southern Values]

I have been up on my literary blog box about the usefulness of being able to categorize the many scandals and nasty acts of the Bush administration as either corrupt or incompetent.

In high irony, one of the things the Phase II Report indicates is that the Bush administration was very competent at getting America to buy into his war. That’s funny but not in a ha ha way.

[Moptop]

Two things, one Lieberman would help McCain with conservatives, ironically.

Second, How is the war unconsitutional? This I would like to hear. No link please, just an explanation in your own words.

[moptop]

Also, Lieberman couldn't wrest Florida from Republicans. Giving the Republicans a further margin is a completely different matter.

As for my question about the constitutionality of the war, forget it. I really am sick of this dialogue of the deaf. Just understand that the Congress has the power to declare war, and they voted on it, and war was declared, for all intents and purposes. This is how the constitution works.

Two Saddam was in violation of the treaty he signed ceasing hostilities from the first Gulf War. A treaty he was forced to sign after invading a neighboring sovereign state, hence the war was a continuation of the first Gulf War. I guess that war was illegal too.

I know neither of these arguments carry any weight with you BDSers, so i decline the dialogue of the deaf sure to ensue if I persue this argument. Have a nice weekend.

[seekeronos]

"--- Second, How is the war unconsitutional? This I would like to hear. No link please, just an explanation in your own words. ---"

Simply enough, we have not had a constitutionally sanctioned war since WW2.

Korea was a UN action that Truman illegally entered into by subordinating our national sovereignty to the UN; Truman failed to bring his case before Congress and ask for a declaration of war against Kim Il-Sung's government.

Vietnam was similarly illegal, although that conflict was more of a "creeping scope" kind of thing where we slowly escalated from providing advice to the South Vietnamese to training the ARVN to actively fighting the NVA/VC (which Nixon later moved out).

Between VN and now, there were a handful of other military actions which weren't "wars"on the scope of what we had fought, but were of questionably constitutionality (invasion of Grenada, invasion of Panama, Gulf War 1) ... while there were undoubtedly various UN resolutions and Congressional authorizations of use of force, none of these fell under the Constitution's requirement that either the Congress had issued a declaration of war, nor had there been any letters of Marque and Reprisal granted for lesser para-military operations (involving such limited scope as the Grenada or Panama operations).

Gulf War II and Afghanistan are no exceptions either.

This war is therefore unconstitutional, and even the congressional vote for authorization for use of force is not constitutionally correct.

In shorter terms, our invasions of Iraq and A'stan are illegal and do not pass a constitutional test.

[Southern Values]

MopTop - Second, How is the war unconsitutional?

A Declaration of War is a law passed by Congress that then demands the president to prosecute the war as effectively as possible — and gives him the means to do so. It is binding on the president and the nation.
The “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002″ (H.J. Res.114), which finally passed both the House of Representatives and the Senate on January 23, 2002, did not do this. Rather, its utility was merely to provide legislators cover for their abdication of their constitutional responsibility concerning the decision to make war. The resolution shuffled off that responsibility to the president, “permitting” him to make the decision to go to war — like the old English monarch — instead.
Eric F. Langborgh 19 Jul 2007

We let Bush and the neo-cons take us into this war trumpeting the whole endeavor in some grand marketing style. Remember the WWII poster = “Huns kill women and children – Tell it to the Marines”. I believe a compliant congress and willful media shepherded us into this war. We gave Bush the tools and wonder why every thing turned to shit.

[Southern Values]

I was going to use a nicer literary metaphor like “we gave the child paint so we can’t complain about the mess”, but it didn’t due justice to misery the man caused.

[seekeronos]

"--- As for my question about the constitutionality of the war, forget it. I really am sick of this dialogue of the deaf. Just understand that the Congress has the power to declare war, and they voted on it, and war was declared, for all intents and purposes. This is how the constitution works. ---"

My apologies.

But the item Congress voted on was not a formal declaration of war, it did not put us on a war economy (at least not by the planned and intended consent of Congress, although we are paying a steep price for it now).

The acceptance or ratification of treaties and resolutions from the UN is another matter.

The Constitution is the law of our land, not what the plutocrats who steer the UN make up for us.

The sooner we get ourselves out of that abomination of a debating club and evict them out of the UN plaza, the better off we will be.

[moptop]

OK, I'll play for a minute.

So basically, if I get you right, Bush should be impeached for doing the same thing that Truman, Kennedy, Nixon, Carter (wasn't that hostage rescue an attack on foreign soil without a declaration of war), Reaga, GHWB and Clinton (Bosnia) did? Do I have that right?

As far as the "Bush Lied" thing, are we using the common meaning of "lie", as in "Made a declarative statement that he knew wasn't true at the time he said it." Anything else is to be mistaken, and I don't think the constitution requires that the president be infallible.

[moptop]

By the way, Iraq has been going quite well for quite a while. Your whole "child with finger paints" metaphor doesn't really hold up, never did, but now it is becoming obvious to most. The punch bowl is empty on that one. Even Kevin Rudd, the new PM of Australia, who once called the war a complete disaster has changed his tune. France has changed their tune. Even FAZ, the large German newspaper wrote a long peice on how the Germans are going to have to accept that the Iraq war has been a success.

[moptop]

Now I really have to go, but I can't resist. I can't spell worth a darn, I know, but I don't claim that my posts are literary, either. If I were you, SV, I would check the grammar on my posts prior to making such grandios claims.