Morning Roundup: Around the Web Riding the Bear
We're in this mess because people were allowed to artificially dicker with mortgage rates, so the Washington Post's news of Washington's intention to do more of the same is not welcome. That said, they aim to do just that.
Credit Suisse to cut 5300 staff jobs according to the Financial Times.
Good news: the Christian Science Monitor reports on the most abundant fossil fuel you've (probably) never heard of.
On the never-stop-trying constitutional amendment front, Indiana to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions? Pam’s house blend blogs about it.
In case you missed it, Robert Reich on why the Big 3 bailout will not result in more fuel-efficient cars.
The New York Times reports on the schism and new denomination forming in the aftermath of the ordination of first openly gay Episcopalian minister.
Rarely do this, but here's the Times again, on how Rahmbo got rich.
Here's Alternet on the death of the NRA.
Mother Jones's Blue Marble Blog reports on Brazil's new dedication to the environment, where deforestation is finally getting some lip service.
Matt Stoller talks about Jeb Bush's weaknesses because it would be a horrible thing to see another Bush in a position of power.
The Guardian reminds us that there is a world beyond the world we normally report on: Zimbabwe declares state of emergency over cholera epidemic. And here's the Los Angeles Times on their diamond fever.
So much stupid.
Morning Roundup.
Methane and shale oil. We should have been investing in technologies to develop those starting years ago. Instead, what are we spending 12 billion a month on? Building a "constitutional Islamic theocracy" in Iraq and supporting the genocide of the Christian people in Iraq.
Scandalous.
We should be looking at our mismanaged companies and what are we talking about? Enshrining discrimination into our constitution. Funny, American Christians don't even know that the gays are their children. The gays are NOT immigrants. They come from the very people that hate them. Odd.
Watching Morning Joe this morning. What an idiot. He and his guests go on and on about Colleges and Universities teaching the most bizarre things. Weird social experiments and supporting the unsupportable. Makes you wonder if he ever went to college. When the right talks about higher education and criticize educational institutions, it’s important to remember that the Christian colleges are all rated no higher than tier four, the lowest rating you can get. It’s because they want to teach “Noah’s Ark” as a “historical event” and the “Flintstones” as a documentary. Disgraceful.
- Email this page
By deanrddDecember 4, 2008 - 9:20amWaitaminute...
I guess it's safe to call democrats homophobes now.. Let's take a look at some of the states who VOTED to ban same sex marriage...
Florida - BLUE STATE
California - BLUE STATE
Indiana (Now trying it) - BLUE STATE
OH, and guess what, Obama is against same-sex marriage too....
Obama told MTV he believes marriage is "between a man and a woman" and that he is "not in favor of gay marriage."
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/03/AR2008120302889...
So Mr. Deanrdd, you need to REALLY look at who is against gay marriage... Look at CA where Obama WON BIG, but the black vote was 70% against gay marriage where whites were about 50/50....
Now who is the bigots.....
Looks like the dems to me.....
As far as Morning Joe (GREAT SHOW).. If you don't like it, CHANGE THE CHANNEL, there are PLENTY more.
PS: I have a wonderful lesbian couple living down the street from me. I'd let them watch my children and would happily attend their marriage, but the BLUE voters voted in a constitutional amendment making that impossible.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 9:42amI heard that figure of
I heard that figure of 70%...and others too, but was never given any proof that it was true. It is a figure based on speculation, as far as I'm concerned, and repeated by the media with no investigation on their part. The reason Obama won big is that a lot of Republicans voted for him.
- Email this page
By MichtouDecember 4, 2008 - 9:45amBy MichtouDecember 4, 2008 - 9:45am
Here is a report for ya, take it as you will.
"Although many of the state's black political leaders spoke out against Proposition 8, an exit poll of California voters showed that black voters favored the measure by a ratio of more than 2 to 1. Not only was the black vote weighted heavily in favor of Proposition 8, but black turnout -- spurred by Barack Obama's historic campaign for president -- was unusually large, with African Americans making up roughly 10% of the state electorate."
www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gayblack8-2008nov08,0,1601616.story
So, becasue Obama was on the ticket, black turned out in droves and because blacks voted 2:1 TO DISCRIMINATE against gays, Prop 8 passed.....
That makes dems at fault for the bans....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 9:53amI'm not convinced. Even if
I'm not convinced. Even if they did vote in favor of Prop 8, it took white votes to pass the measure. There aren't enough blacks in California to pass the measure. It was the white vote that caused it to pass.
- Email this page
By MichtouDecember 4, 2008 - 10:01amApparently there are still some people who happily buy into
the tried and true repub strategy of the wedge issue. The economy is in its worst shape since the Great Depression, the automakers are ready to collapse, a quarter million people lost their jobs last month, adding to the 1.2 million that had already lost their jobs this year, foreclosures continue to skyrocket, US carbon emissions increased 1.7% last year, but it's STILL more important to be talking about whether it's ok for two men or two women to get married?
No wonder this country is in such deep trouble. Its citizens are too damn stupid to understand what's truly important. Hell, we may be broke and out of work, and climate change will be wreaking havoc on the earth, threatening our very survival, but at LEAST we didn't let those evil gay people get married!
America once again tries to desperately prove to the world that it is the land of blatant stupidity and idiocy. What did the rest of the world ever see in us?
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 10:10amBy MichtouDecember 4, 2008 - 10:01am
Look if you don't want to believe the numbers, that is your problem... You can have your own opinion but NOT your own facts....
African-American voters
A controversial aspect of the poll regards African-American voting patterns. The exit poll showed that of the approximately 224 African Americans polled, 70% (approximately 157) voted in favor of the measure. No other racial or ethnic group in the poll backed the measure by more than 53%, the figure for Latino support. Further, African-American turnout, speculated to have been spurred by Barack Obama's campaign for president, was unusually high, making up roughly 10% of those polled.[9][10] Critics have objected to media accounts that uncritically report this data as placing undue responsibility for the passage of Proposition 8 on African-American voters. [11]
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)
"I'm not convinced. Even if they did vote in favor of Prop 8, it took white votes to pass the measure. There aren't enough blacks in California to pass the measure."
Did I ever say that there weren't white people who voted for prop 8? Nooooooooo. But the vast number of blacks who supported Prop 8 certainly helped it's passage...
Hmmm, if we removed the black vote from the general election, who would have won? Obama won 95% of the black vote. Blacks made up from 11-14% of the electerate, that means out of 128.4 mill votes cast, 13.4 mill were black votes for Obama. Take those away and McCain wins, so blacks elected Obama and BLACKs voted to discriminate against gays.... Therefore, the numbers say blacks are bigoted against gays....
Your ball...
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 10:20amAnd if you take away the white vote
Obama wins. What is your point, moron?
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000December 4, 2008 - 10:24amI think blacks are being
I think blacks are being scapegoated on this issue. I don't think their votes made enough of a difference because they only make up 6 percent of the California population.
And here's a little more info on the situation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5byRR4ci3M&eurl=http://airamerica.com/bl...
It seems you are overlooking WHITE REPUBLICANS in your desperate attempt to blame blacks for Proposition 8.
- Email this page
By MichtouDecember 5, 2008 - 9:38pmBy MichtouDecember 5, 2008 - 9:38pm
Dude, the state went BLUE, just like FL and Indiana... BLUE STATE.... Yes, republicans probably voted for Prop 8 and (I disagree with them on it). But there weren't enough republicans to hand the states over to McCain or he'd be President Elect.
You miss the point. CA voted for Obama (by a bunch) yet still voted FOR prop 8. Democrats control that state you can't blame republicans for prop 8. And, 70% of the black voters voted FOR prop 8....
Dems da facts.....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 5, 2008 - 10:17pmDude, you don't get it. The
Dude, you don't get it.
The blacks didn't make enough difference. It was the WHITE REPUBLICANS that passed Proposition 8.
- Email this page
By MichtouDecember 5, 2008 - 10:30pmBy MichtouDecember 5, 2008 - 10:30pm
Dude, you don't get it. There weren't enough WHITE REPUBLICANS to win the state. Prop 8 passed in a MAJOR BLUE STATE and 70% of BLACKS voted to discriminate. THAT IS A FACT....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 6, 2008 - 9:19amYou're wrong about
You're wrong about California being a "major blue state." It's always been an independent state. I live out in the middle of Republican country. People here voted Obama. They also voted Prop. 8.
There are far more white Republicans in California than there are black people of either party (and yes, I do know some black Republicans too).
You have fallen for the fallacious and mendacious math because you don't want to believe what is fairly obvious.
- Email this page
By MichtouDecember 6, 2008 - 10:50amBy MichtouDecember 6, 2008 - 10:50am
Once again....DUDE, OBAMA won by California 67.1 - 37.1!!!! That is a WIPE OUT! Prop 8 passed 52.3 - 47.7. That means WAY more people voted to DISCRIMINATE than there were TOTAL republicans. And you know where they made SERIOUS ground. Blacks. They vote 70% in favor to DISCRIMINATE.
Those are the FACTS. If EVERY person who voted for McCain voted for prop 8, that would have only been 37.1%. 15.2% of people who voted for Obama voted FOR prop 8, and that is if EVERY McCain voter voted for it (and they didn't)......
Here's the numbers. Now, make your case that 70% of the Black population didn't vote to discriminate against gays........
http: //vote.sos.ca.gov/
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 7, 2008 - 9:04pmI can't have one?
Still fightn? Against the gays? Is it working? Is your life better? Is their life better?
What made the difference was the tens of millions of dollars paid for by the Mormons to slander the gays. Their own people marched "Temple Square" in Salt Lake City in protest that their hard earned money is being thrown away denying rights to a bunch of people they don't know, will never meet, and don't care anything about.
One of my favorite signs, "How come they can have five wives and I can't have one?"
- Email this page
By deanrddDecember 4, 2008 - 10:22amNow look at the other states
that banned it. Red states. So it must be Repubs who are the bigots. Christ, you are a moron. You must have recorded the druggie and played it back 10 times.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000December 4, 2008 - 10:08amShale oil and methane????
Shale oil is one of the most expensive and environmentally destructive fossil fuel sources around. Plus, both shale oil and methane are still carbon-based fuel sources, so we do absolutely nothing to curb carbon emissions by using them. Last year, the US INCREASED its CO2 output by 1.7%. Now THAT is absolutely stupid. Not only are we not putting the brakes on to avoid hitting the wall, we are actually ACCELERATING toward the wall!!! Now THAT is totally stupid.
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 9:44amThat is why technologies are developed.
Not just to get them (shale oil and methane) out of the ground and burn them, but to do so in a responsible way. Science and technology are marvelous things. They need a chance to grow. I don't even pretend to know more than people who can send a working robot to Mars. However, I do know that "Noah's Ark" is a fable.
- Email this page
By deanrddDecember 4, 2008 - 10:16amI read the article and I stand by my earlier statement
The methane hydrates are just natural gas in a different form. Hence, they are not "clean", as fighty says they are. They produce greenhouse gases as they are burned. And yes, they are dangerous, as the article says. as the methane hydrates ascend up the borehole, they cool, meaning they can re-solidify, blocking the drill hole and causing a large explosion. If the raw gas escapes into the atmosphere, it is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more effective than CO2. So, this "miracle" fuel of the article is nothing of the sort, just another fossil fuel in a different form.
As for giving the Middle East the finger, as fighty puts it, even the commercials from his beloved oil companies state that most of our oil DOES NOT come from the Middle East at all. It comes from evil empires like Canada! It is apparent that his desire to "give the Middle East the finger" is actually racism cloaked in his supposed desire for energy independence.
Have you noticed that the "drill baby drill" rhetoric has completely disappeared from the rhetoric of our trolls? Why is that, do you think? Could it be that Rush and Hannity and the rest have completely dropped that subject? They certainly didn't give a shit about it until the election, when they thought it would benefit them. Now that the election is over and gas continues to drop in price, it's forgotten once again. Where's all those offshore oil rigs we were told the oil companies wanted to build? Could it be that they never cared about American energy independence in the first place, only about making their obscence profits? Since offshore oil costs anywhere from $50-75 per barrel to produce, depending on the location and extraction difficulties, it makes no economic sense for them to do that kind of work when oil is at $46 per barrel and still dropping. Of course, if they TRULY wanted us to be energy independent, that wouldn't factor into the equation, because we still import oil from other "unstable" countries even at $20 per barrel.
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 1:09pmBy UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 1:09pm
Have you noticed that the "drill baby drill" rhetoric has completely disappeared from the rhetoric of our trolls? Why is that, do you think?
Ummm, could it be that oil is $49 a barrel? At that price, I doubt they could break even drilling. The oil companies must at least break even, don' cha' think?
Could it be that Rush and Hannity and the rest have completely dropped that subject?
-Dude, the repubs lost...this time.. And with gas at $1.75/gal there simply is no will from the American people to push for drilling. Americans have short memories which is why those who are buying vehicles are looking at SUVs and trucks again (bad move).
You can say what ever you want about racism. Do I have an issue with the oil empires of the mid-east being able to choke the world.. Yep. Oh and I remember a discussion not long ago about how the price of oil would skyrocket if we attacked Iran. Now, we don't get most of our oil from Iran so why should we care if they were to close the Straights of Hormuz (sp?)?
-Wait, I'll answer that. It's because eventhough WE don't get most of OUR oil from the mid-east, the PRICE of a barrel is globally set. If there was a glut on the market because we switched to high MPG and electric vehicles, there would be MORE of a glut and the price per barrel would fall even more thereby putting the SCREWS to the mid-east and Chavez (BONUS!).
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 8:08pmI'm a plain spoken person.
But I get really pissed when some oil company and the USGS wants to spend zillions to drill in ice cubes for more dangerous, polluting fossil fuels.
But! NOT 1 Fucking penny for 1 fucking solar panel!!
Tell me why before I blow my fucking brains out!
CoyoteMan
- Email this page
By CoyoteManDecember 4, 2008 - 10:38amMethane? Dangerous? Isn't that what we cook with?
.
- Email this page
By deanrddDecember 4, 2008 - 10:41amBy CoyoteManDecember 4, 2008 - 10:38am
I see AA took down the link, but here it is...
Did you even READ the article? It's CLEAN burning METHANE....
http:/ /features.csmonitor.com/environment/2008/12/03/the-abundant-fossil-fuel-you%E2%80%99ve-never-heard-of/
"Hydrates have been hailed as a paradigm shift in how to achieve energy independence and as a massively abundant source of cleaner-burning natural gas. Others fear it represents an environmental disaster in the making. Until recently it was thought too dangerous and too costly to extract to be of use."
Yes, solar, wind and nuclear are the way of the long term future. But, we need a bridge to get us there and the sooner we can give the "finger" to the middle east, the better! Natural gas is a good one.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 10:51amtwo paths, same destination?
Funny how different motives can perhaps lead to the same location. I want to get off fossil fuels and onto renewable sources of energy to save the environment, lower fuel costs, and basically have a "greener" planet.
StillFightn's racism tells him that he wants to get the US off fossil fuels just so he can "give the finger" to all those non-white people over there in the middle east.
I guess we want the same thing, but certainly one of us has much more "pure" motives than the others.
-- Yes we DID!!!! --
- Email this page
By dtaylo75December 4, 2008 - 12:52pmBy dtaylo75December 4, 2008 - 12:52pm
Who has the pure motives? Oh, so you LIKED it when we were paying $4.00 a gallon... You LIKED it when during the Carter administration OPEC put a strangle hold on us? This is a national security issue. How is it racist to want to be out from under the thumb of those who would destroy our economy?
Whatever. I guess that EVERY white person that voted for McCain is a racist too...
PS: I voted Obama partly because once I learned about Palin, I didn't want her ANYWHERE near the White House....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 1:18pmGee, have you noticed that gas prices have dropped for
78 straight days, to a level not seen since 2005? Must be because the saintly oil companies were able to drill hundreds of offshore oil wells, and have therefore driven down the cost of gas, right?
No, they haven't? Then how did this blessed miracle occur? Could it be that we were able to cut the price of gas by more than 50% by simply lowering consumption, courtesy of the Bush Depression? In other words, we accomplished what we needed without drilling for a single drop of new oil, just as many of us had been saying all along. It would have been far preferable for us to have done it voluntarily, as part of a plan, rather than because of economic collapse, but the end result is the same.
Now we don't have to be under the thumb of those who would destroy our economy---Canada!!!
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 1:27pmBy UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 1:27pm
No, they haven't? Then how did this blessed miracle occur? Could it be that we were able to cut the price of gas by more than 50% by simply lowering consumption, courtesy of the Bush Depression?
-Dude, c'mon you know that the economic slowdown is GLOBAL and not just that US. GLOBAL demand has declined, depressing the price of oil (and really SCREWING the govts of Venezuela and Iran - WO HOO!!!!!).
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95924814
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez depends on oil for half the government's revenue and almost all of its export earnings. As oil prices rose to historic highs, Venezuela's spending increased accordingly. A continued drop in oil revenue could put a major pinch on Chavez's ambitious social programs."
http: //news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081203/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_economy
"TEHRAN, Iran – Iran's hard-line president has acknowledged publicly for the first time that his country's economy is taking a severe beating from tumbling oil prices, a damaging admission by a leader whose popularity is eroding ahead of a tough re-election battle next year."
YEAH!!! Let them TAKE IT IN THE SHORTS for a while...
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 2:07pmSo, in other words, you agree with me that we saw oil and
gas prices drop NOT because we "drilled our way out of it", but because demand decreased, (albeit in a way we didn't want to see, via economic collapse).
So, do we still need energy independence? If so, why the hell have the right wingers suddenly gone silent? I haven't heard "drill baby drill" in a long time now, in fact, ever since McCain got stomped in the election. Could it be that the whole thing was a cynical ploy by repubs to get votes, on a par with "compassionate conservatism"?
As soon as I see Exxon/Mobil putting up offshore oil platforms by the boatload and drilling on land for which they have had rights for years, I will believe that they truly want us to be energy-independent. Until then, every day that goes by with no signs of zealous exploration and exploitation of new oil resources will be further proof that the oil companies don't give a shit about energy independence. Their bottom line is the ONLY thing that matters to them. That's fine with me; I just want them to stop lying about their true motives.
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyDecember 4, 2008 - 4:42pmWho has the pure motives?
Ummmm, of course I didn't like it when we were paying 4 dollars plus a gallon. What does that have to do with the fact that your motivation for getting off fossil fuels is to "give the finger" (your words not mine) to those non-white folks in Arabia? If there was abundant oil here in the US (like there is in the middle east) and it was cheap, would you even be considering getting off fossil fuels?
Look in the mirror! You're motivation for getting off fossil fuels has NOTHING to do with saving the planet and the environment. You just can't STAND the fact that Arabia has a resource that we need and some dark skinned guy is getting rich off it!
No, but everyone who is a racist did vote for McCain. Somehow I can't see the KKK / Aryan Nation type nutjobs voting for Obama.
-- Yes we DID!!!! --
- Email this page
By dtaylo75December 4, 2008 - 1:41pmBy dtaylo75December 4, 2008 - 1:41pm
No, but everyone who is a racist did vote for McCain. Somehow I can't see the KKK / Aryan Nation type nutjobs voting for Obama.
Wow, that sounds at LOT like.... Not every Muslim is a terrorist but almost everyone who is a terrorist is a Muslim...
Better yet.. Not all blacks voted for Obama but how many blacks voted for Obama BECAUSE he was black? In other words, they voted against McCain BECAUSE he was white. Sounds like racism to me. I wonder how many people in the Nation of Islam voted for McCain? Nation of Islam and the KKK are two sides of the same coin....
Look in the mirror! You're motivation for getting off fossil fuels has NOTHING to do with saving the planet and the environment.
-Ok get one thing straight. I DON'T BELIEVE ALGORE.... Yes, I do believe that the Earth's temp has changed over time and we MAY have some VERY small impact on that but to NOWHERE near the extent that he says. Is he right on some things? OH HELL YES. I totally agree with him that fossil fuels are finite and therefore as we use more the price goes up. But solar, wind, geothermal (and nuke) are not finite and as technology gets better it gets cheaper (check out flat screen TV prices) and we will harness them to satisfy our energy needs. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
I get that we only import a small portion of our oil from the mid-east but oil is a GLOBAL commodity. When the price goes up, it goes up for all (even though we import most form Canada and Mexico). If the US can get off of it, it'll create a global oil glut that could result in the decline of the Mideast as an economic power. THAT IS A GOOD THING. Energy independence is a good thing for the US.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 2:00pmYou cant disagree with Gore
about man made global warming because it is a proven fact. But you can lie about it, deny reality and let the druggy think for you as you always do.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000December 4, 2008 - 2:07pmBy hufflarry2000December 4, 2008 - 2:07pm
Ummm, no.. It's not.
Is there evidence of "climate change"... Yep. Is there evidence that WE are doing it... Nope..
Love ya Huff (eventhough you are a racist)... Mean it!
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnDecember 4, 2008 - 2:20pmIt is a proven fact among
normal thinking educated people. That means the vast majority of people. It is a left wing conspiracy among deluded ditto heads who get their info from a drug addicted, lying draft dodger. That means a small minority of people.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000December 4, 2008 - 2:42pmIdiot, of course there are
Idiot, of course there are other types of terrorists other than Muslims (Timmy McV anyone?). My point was, Aryan Nation and KKK folks voted for McCain, 100%. Disagree? Then you really are an idiot!
Ok, don't believe Al Gore. Believe the legions of environmental scientists, government scientists, researches and the mountains of empirical evidence. In fact, if you exclude anyone on an Oil Company payroll, the number of detractors from Climate Change is pretty small!
You and the rest of the “Flat Earth” society can keep your heads in the dirt for as long as you want, you are an insignificant minority.
-- Yes we DID!!!! --
- Email this page
By dtaylo75December 4, 2008 - 4:04pmYou know what would really be cool?
During WWII all those auto companies started building tanks. The equipment, the workers, and the infrastructure were there. Just like today.
Each one of those wind turbines has thousands of machined parts as well as sturdy metal shells. If some of that auto capacity was turned to building wind turbines, they could be plugged into the existing grid as soon as they are finished. They would start making money right away. The mid west is one of the windiest places in the US. Those fields could be grow crops and way above the fields, electricity.
Of course, that's too easy.
- Email this page
By deanrddDecember 6, 2008 - 11:35am