US POLITICS SPRING 2011: Let's just call off this country.

you know you're in deep shit when Sen. Conrad is being criticized for being too liberal

Nelson's makeup is ghastly.

drill Bammy drill

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0514/Obama-says-Drill-baby-drill.-Will-new-oil-policy-ease-gas-prices

this surely will lower gas prices!

excellent move!

yeah. that was the first thing i heard this morning (alarm clock tuned to NPR): "and President Obama proposed expanding domestic oil production..." and i knew today would be shit-tay

here's the deal. everyone knows this won't make a dent in oil prices in the short-term. blowhards who love heritage foundation and their ilk want to con themselves into believing that it will make a difference in prices in the mid-to-longterm, but they've got their blinders on, as usual.

interestingly, the big green environmental organizations haven't made much of a fuss about this, yet.

i give up on obama. he's a politician, he makes these moves for what he believes to be political gain (even though gas prices are going up this summer, they're going to stay up for the foreseeable future absent another recession, and no one who is stupid enough to think the president can control the price of gasoline is going to give him credit for moves like this that are intended to show that he's taking steps to lower the price - they probably still think that the ATM is a magic machine that distributes cash out of heaven or something), but god, it's so so disappointing to see him play political games with nature.

have no idea why i placed "here's the deal." at the beginning of that. maybe reading too much krugman.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_D-pHGonSYyA/SlK_tACvN1I/AAAAAAAAB3s/17E0Z_2yhPY/s400/Titanic+Deck+Chairs.jpg

chair in the front needs to moved 3 inches to the right imo

Weird that Obama would do this now, but then, dude's political timing has always been awful. Like, why not wait to see if this even becomes an issue during the campaign before you OK more domestic drilling? Or at least have it in your back pocket, ready to be signed, should it flare up as a real concern. Regardless, if domestic drilling somehow morphs into a major campaign debate, again, with all the other shit going on, I give up now.

Anyway, maybe if we're lucky (hah) there'll be a major on-land domestic oil disaster, and Obama will put this decision on hold for a few months, too, like he did re: the Gulf. And then he can turn around and approve it when the next soul-deadning natural disaster takes our mind elsewhere.

or, you know, he could just point to stuff like this

http://i54.tinypic.com/2m5neol.gif

as a way of saying "hey look, the meme that i destroyed domestic oil production is rong" and "hey look, it doesn't impact GLOBAL oil prices you fucking morans". but no, we'll all continue to play this horrible game

what's the doomsayers' nearest/furthest projection on when declining oil will take us from fucked to truly & completely fucked?

heh, well i think the (and sanpaku + others feel free to disagree/correct me) is that global oil production peaked a few years ago (2006-2008), that it was the recession that reduced prices (by driving down demand), and now that demand is rising again, and production is still at a plateau, we're in a deeply cynical scenario where the faster the "recovery" occurs, the faster we go back to the limits that we broached back in 2008/2009, when gas prices were skyrocketing. there have always been a few peak oil camps, one of which believes that peak oil will precipitate an obvious collapse/tragedy, and another that believes that it will be more of an undulating recession process, where recessions temporarily drive the price of oil down, only to spike again once economies recover, etc etc. the latter scenario sounds more likely to me (but again i'd love to hear what others think).

as far as fucked vs. completely fucked, i don't think we're at "fucked" yet. plenty of people still commute for an hour+ each direction every day, and when we're fucked, that won't be commonplace anymore.

i represent doom

Z_S, I think that is a very fair description of the stage we're at in the oil production switchover to flat or falling oil reserves. It is also noteworthy that, as a rule, price spikes will tend to be sharp on the upside, but slow to fall on the downside.

The steep decline in oil prices from Oct 08 to Jan 09 were due to factors well outside the oil markets, linked to a sudden conflagration of monetary assets during the CDO/mortgage-backed securities meltdown.

why so many right wingers on the shows this morning?

ABC - "This Week" - Gov. Nikki Haley, R-S.C.; Sheila Bair, head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

NBC - "Meet the Press" - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

CBS - "Face the Nation" - House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

CNN - "State of the Union" - Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

CNN - "Fareed Zakaria GPS" - American leadership, Condoleezza Rice and Eric Schmidt

1 democrat, 1 technocrat, 6 republicans. that's fox news style

how can you trust a Democrat with this economy?

too true

as a bonus mitch albom is on the sports reporters this morning

no one who is stupid enough to think the president can control the price of gasoline is going to give him credit for moves like this

and apparently only ~9% are (presently) that stupid. expanding drilling dosen't even really make good political sense at this point...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2011/05/05/AFLD6R2F_graphic.html

kevin :D :D :D

Democrats didn't kill anybody to make us 'safer' this week, not worth the facetime.

the big green [sic] environmental orgs haven't made a stink about Bam's drilling bcz they are whores with their legs permanently open for their Dem patrons.

also, it's not a "political" move any more than his next breath is. IT'S WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.

and apparently only ~9% are (presently) that stupid

~14%, rather

Of course Obama's new drilling strategy is not even big enough for the Republicans(who are complaining that it is not enough no matter the facts), who will also likely succeed with the aid of rightish-Dems in killing the plan to end tax subsidies for the richest oil companies.

The Dems also need to have a united front in the media--or at least in complaining that they can't get on the mainstream media Sunday talk shows that the elite value so much.

i don't like this offshore drilling. it was already well established that his restrictions on drilling had no immediate impact on prices, but it as inevitable such pandering would occur.

I want a socialist President dammit.

And in a more minor thing first highlighted by Aero upthread, Boehner got away with delivering the commencement at Catholic U. -- a standing ovation with only a few protestors echoing that previous letter re his lack of compassion

His policies reflect different values than the values of social work professionals, which are to help people who are poor, vulnerable and repressed,” Jamison said.

Jamison and about 30 other students, all graduate students in social work, were part of a small, quiet protest against the House speaker. There were no jeers or chants. Several protest organizers said they didn’t want to detract from the ceremony. While there was no outward protest from the faculty, many did not join the students in their standing ovation to Boehner’s sometimes teary speech.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/for-house-speaker-boehners-catholic-charity-scrutinized-at-commencement-address/2011/05/14/AFNOxi3G_story.html

NBC - "Meet the Press" - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

listening to the replay of this right now and david gregory asks him about a speech he gave where he calls obama the food stamps president, and is like 'is this racist?' gingrich gets pretty agitated! very entertaining. then of course newt goes on to elaborate about how rick perry/texas plans for solving economic problems are so much better than the terrible situation in detroit, and the central issue of the election is paychecks versus food stamps

uh..

Everyone here loves George Will, right? Yes, I thought so. This morning, with a great flourish, he said that come January, 2013, "we know"--I'm pretty sure those were his exact words--that one of three men will be standing there as the next president: Barack Obama, Tim Pawlenty, or Mitch Daniels.

"we" = Cokie and her Sunday brunch guests.

pawlenty vs obama seems like a good bet to me

Just to clarify, I checked the clip and he said "we know with reasonable certainty..." He didn't mention anything about brunch, though.

It's racist against poor people. That's the kind of racism that isn't allowed to be discussed and it's people like David Gregory in comments like this that helps keep that off the table.

Will has had a boner for Mitch Daniels for years now; it seems unrequited.

Or if you can't get with Will, Sullivan soldiers on: "I'm left with Bachmann and Palin. It's their game of chicken now." (It's not really clear if he means the nomination, or just Evangelical Christian support.)

since i've whined about obama's tendency to give away things and get nothing in return for them, totally unprompted, i'll let joe romm do it for me this time:

Even worse, Obama is not merely adopting the GOP rhetoric — but getting nothing whatsoever in return for it. Obama says we should “eliminate the taxpayer subsidies we give to oil and gas companies.” Well, if you are planning to cave on drilling, how about at least getting the subsidy elimination as part of the deal?

morbz and greenwald may be right: this is what he wants.

If the president and his allies operate on the principle that failure to raise the debt ceiling is an unthinkable outcome, to be avoided at all cost, then they have ceded all power to those willing to bring that outcome about. In effect, they will have ripped up the Constitution and given control over America’s government to a party that only controls one house of Congress, but claims to be willing to bring down the economy unless it gets what it wants.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/16/opinion/16krugman.html?_r=1&hp

krugman breathing heat this morning

At some point — and sooner rather than later — the president has to draw a line. Otherwise, he might as well move out of the White House, and hand the keys over to the Tea Party.

At some point — and sooner rather than later — the president has to draw a line.

lol

on 'meet the press' or whatever he was more blunt, urging default over cutting social security, medicare, etc

But the president can’t call the extortionists’ bluff unless he’s willing to confront them, and accept the associated risks.

oh well, then

Uh:

CROWLEY: And I think I can get a yes or no from you on this. No tax increases will you accept at all in either the short, the medium or the long term, and that includes close tax loopholes?

MCCONNELL: Well, there aren’t going to be any tax increases. You know, that was settled by last November’s election. The president knows that.

that's when I reach for my revolver

this debt ceiling nonsense is the worst kind of kabuki.

otm.

It's time for Obama to conclude that being tough on domestic issues will win over independents....But I'm not counting on it.

What is the consensus that not limiting the debt ceiling would collapse the US economy? It seems like a number of armchair economists are saying i would definitely happen, but even entertaining the possibility is telling. What would be the Republican gain from doing this? Destroying the value of all their funds? Proving in a single swoop that political gain is more important than the welfare of American people?

I can't take them seriously, and any Dem who purports to do so is basically using EVIL REPUBLICANS as a body shield while caving in to their plutocratic ideals.

yeah i wish they'd just start reaganing, call the gop's bluff, and explain why the debt's mostly republican tax cuts, medicare part d, refusal to let the government bargain for medication prices, iraqistan, and the fallout of the bush/cheney deregulation recession. except they've been doing that now for two and a half years, and who won the last election? "citizens united." it's a little scary when you think about it. reminds me of how effectively they swift-boated a decorated war hero in favor of a national guard pilot

It's time for Obama to conclude that "being tough" (in lib-fantasy terms) on domestic issues is incompatible with raising a billion campaign dollars

public financing of campaigns would be ideal. until then

Really? Perhaps outside the Beltway, Obama would get just as many donors through showing he's fully capable of holding asshole GOP feet to the fire. I'd send money if there was proof of that.