Monday, August 4, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Regarding Obama being risky
Regarding Obama being risky - you know what you will get with McCain - more of the same.
Our country was founded on risk, our innovations, our creativity, our progress is all based on risk. The founding fathers took a risk when they chose to challenge English rule. Americans took a risk when the ventured westward. Orville and Wilbur Wright took a risk when they flew at Kittyhawk. We took a risk when we shot a man into space, when we first orbited the earth, when we landed a man on the moon.
When someone starts up a their own business - is this not a risk? When you try something new, think outside the box - is this not a risk?
If we played it "safe" like McCain wants to do - we'd still be 13 english colonies, and probably huddled safely in underground bunkers like rabbits.
McCain is trying to brand himself as something known and equate it with safe and comfortable like a old pair of shoes, but when the old shoe has a big hole in the bottom maybe it's time to take a risk and try on a new pair.
Riddle: Where does McCain stand on the issues?
Answer: ummmm...what day is it?
Our country was founded on risk, our innovations, our creativity, our progress is all based on risk. The founding fathers took a risk when they chose to challenge English rule. Americans took a risk when the ventured westward. Orville and Wilbur Wright took a risk when they flew at Kittyhawk. We took a risk when we shot a man into space, when we first orbited the earth, when we landed a man on the moon.
When someone starts up a their own business - is this not a risk? When you try something new, think outside the box - is this not a risk?
If we played it "safe" like McCain wants to do - we'd still be 13 english colonies, and probably huddled safely in underground bunkers like rabbits.
McCain is trying to brand himself as something known and equate it with safe and comfortable like a old pair of shoes, but when the old shoe has a big hole in the bottom maybe it's time to take a risk and try on a new pair.
Riddle: Where does McCain stand on the issues?
Answer: ummmm...what day is it?
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
McCain Ad a Full Tank of Nonsense
McCain Ad a Full Tank of Nonsense
McCain ad says Obama's the guy to thank for emptying our wallets at the filling station. We say that's ridiculous.
By Viveca Novak factcheck.org
Jul 22, 2008 Updated: 2:08 p.m. ET Jul 22, 2008
Summary
McCain's new ad accuses Obama of keeping gas prices high, all by himself. That's absurd, and McCain knows it – he has said repeatedly that our current problems were "30 years in the making."
The ad also tells us that gas prices are high because "some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America." Not true. The federal government's estimate is that if the moratorium on offshore drilling were lifted today, it would be 2030 before we'd see a noticeable effect on supply
For the same reason, it's simply not true that drilling more now will "rescue our family budgets."
Analysis
Sen. John McCain, who's expected to receive the Republican presidential nomination in September, goes after Sen. Barack Obama, his Democratic counterpart, with a new ad that focuses on the cost of gas. According to McCain's campaign, the spot will air on national cable channels and in unspecified "key states."
Lousy Linkage
McCain 2008 TV Ad: "Pump"
The ad opens with a shot of an old-fashioned gas pump standing on a shimmering, moving, body of – water? desert sand? petroleum? It's hard to tell. The female narrator says: "Gas prices – $4, $5, no end in sight, because some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America. No to independence from foreign oil."
"Some" are indeed opposed to lifting the moratorium on new drilling in the waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, and they include Obama.
What's not true, however, is that current opposition to lifting the moratorium has anything to do with today's gas prices. They aren't high because any one individual is against ending the ban. As we have pointed out previously, the Energy Information Administration estimates that if the go-ahead were given right now for such drilling, it would be 2030 before there would be enough oil flowing to have a "significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices." Is there "no end in sight" because of opposition to ending the moratorium? No more so than because of opposition to hastening the development of alternative sources of energy and new kinds of cars. But most experts believe that if we haven't implemented other strategies well before 2030, we're in deep trouble.
As for saying "no to independence from foreign oil," we suppose someone, somewhere, might be saying that – quietly, to themselves, in a small, soundproof room – but no major-party presidential candidate that we're aware of is doing so.
Thank-You Note, Returned to Sender
The most glaring bit of calumny in the ad occurs when the narrator asks, "Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?" At that point the volume goes up on the soundtrack's background noise, and we realize it's a crowd of voices chanting "O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma!" just as the Illinois Democrat's image appears on-screen.
The notion that Obama is singlehandedly, or to any significant degree, or more than most other senators, to blame for the high cost of gas is absurd in too many ways to count here. Okay, we'll give you a couple: Obama has been in the Senate only since 2005. McCain himself said earlier this month that the problem has been decades in the making.
In fact, he has been saying this repeatedly. McCain has been in Congress for a quarter of a century, a span that nearly corresponds with the one he mentioned in his speech. Does that mean McCain might fit the profile of someone to thank for high gas prices more easily than Obama? One could note, for example, that McCain has voted against increases in corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards on two occasions, in 2003 and 2005, even though he teamed with Democratic Sen. John Kerry back in 2002 on a bill to raise the standards to 36 mpg by 2015. McCain's Web site proposes enforcing existing CAFE standards, not tightening them, as Obama would do.
But no one person can be pinned with the credit or the blame for something as vague as "rising prices at the pump." OPEC policy, the weather, wars in oil-producing countries, refinery capacity, consumer demand, environmental concerns, the value of the dollar and a host of other considerations factor into the cost of a fill-up. In fact, McCain may be paying Obama an inadvertent compliment by alleging he has such influence in this area.
Both candidates have energy proposals to reduce U.S. dependence on oil. Obama's was first, and its centerpiece is a 10-year, $150 billion spending plan focusing on clean coal technology, further development of plug-in hybrid cars, commercialization of wind and solar power, and other measures.
McCain's, which is called the Lexington Project, includes building 45 new nuclear power plants; offering a $300 million prize for major advancement of low-cost, plug-in hybrid or electric car technology; and "encouraging the market" in wind, hydro and solar power. Both he and Obama would cut use of fossil fuels to combat climate change.
Lousy Linkage Redux
The ad comes full circle as the narrator tells us, "One man knows we must now drill more in America and rescue our family budgets." Let us reiterate our earlier point that opening up the OCS for drilling now wouldn't have much impact on supply or prices until 2030, according to the government. So forget about rescuing "our family budgets." In 22 years, it'll be other families' budgets – maybe our children's – that will be at issue.
McCain even acknowledged as much in late June when, after saying that drilling would have a positive effect on prices in the short term, he backtracked and said he believed it would have a beneficial "psychological impact."
That seems to have slipped his mind.
===============
McCain admits Iraq is about Oil:
McCain ad says Obama's the guy to thank for emptying our wallets at the filling station. We say that's ridiculous.
By Viveca Novak factcheck.org
Jul 22, 2008 Updated: 2:08 p.m. ET Jul 22, 2008
Summary
McCain's new ad accuses Obama of keeping gas prices high, all by himself. That's absurd, and McCain knows it – he has said repeatedly that our current problems were "30 years in the making."
The ad also tells us that gas prices are high because "some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America." Not true. The federal government's estimate is that if the moratorium on offshore drilling were lifted today, it would be 2030 before we'd see a noticeable effect on supply
For the same reason, it's simply not true that drilling more now will "rescue our family budgets."
Analysis
Sen. John McCain, who's expected to receive the Republican presidential nomination in September, goes after Sen. Barack Obama, his Democratic counterpart, with a new ad that focuses on the cost of gas. According to McCain's campaign, the spot will air on national cable channels and in unspecified "key states."
Lousy Linkage
McCain 2008 TV Ad: "Pump"
Announcer: Gas prices - $4, $5, no end in sight, because some in Washington are
still saying no to drilling in America.
No to independence from foreign
oil.
Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?
Chant:
Obama, Obama
Announcer: One man knows we must now drill more in America
and rescue our family budgets.
Don't hope for more energy, vote for it.
McCain.
John McCain: I'm John McCain and I approve this message.
The ad opens with a shot of an old-fashioned gas pump standing on a shimmering, moving, body of – water? desert sand? petroleum? It's hard to tell. The female narrator says: "Gas prices – $4, $5, no end in sight, because some in Washington are still saying no to drilling in America. No to independence from foreign oil."
"Some" are indeed opposed to lifting the moratorium on new drilling in the waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, and they include Obama.
What's not true, however, is that current opposition to lifting the moratorium has anything to do with today's gas prices. They aren't high because any one individual is against ending the ban. As we have pointed out previously, the Energy Information Administration estimates that if the go-ahead were given right now for such drilling, it would be 2030 before there would be enough oil flowing to have a "significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices." Is there "no end in sight" because of opposition to ending the moratorium? No more so than because of opposition to hastening the development of alternative sources of energy and new kinds of cars. But most experts believe that if we haven't implemented other strategies well before 2030, we're in deep trouble.
As for saying "no to independence from foreign oil," we suppose someone, somewhere, might be saying that – quietly, to themselves, in a small, soundproof room – but no major-party presidential candidate that we're aware of is doing so.
Thank-You Note, Returned to Sender
The most glaring bit of calumny in the ad occurs when the narrator asks, "Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?" At that point the volume goes up on the soundtrack's background noise, and we realize it's a crowd of voices chanting "O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma!" just as the Illinois Democrat's image appears on-screen.
The notion that Obama is singlehandedly, or to any significant degree, or more than most other senators, to blame for the high cost of gas is absurd in too many ways to count here. Okay, we'll give you a couple: Obama has been in the Senate only since 2005. McCain himself said earlier this month that the problem has been decades in the making.
McCain, July 7: Our dangerous dependence on foreign oil has been 30 years in the making, and was caused by the failure of politicians in Washington to think long-term about the future of the country.
In fact, he has been saying this repeatedly. McCain has been in Congress for a quarter of a century, a span that nearly corresponds with the one he mentioned in his speech. Does that mean McCain might fit the profile of someone to thank for high gas prices more easily than Obama? One could note, for example, that McCain has voted against increases in corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards on two occasions, in 2003 and 2005, even though he teamed with Democratic Sen. John Kerry back in 2002 on a bill to raise the standards to 36 mpg by 2015. McCain's Web site proposes enforcing existing CAFE standards, not tightening them, as Obama would do.
But no one person can be pinned with the credit or the blame for something as vague as "rising prices at the pump." OPEC policy, the weather, wars in oil-producing countries, refinery capacity, consumer demand, environmental concerns, the value of the dollar and a host of other considerations factor into the cost of a fill-up. In fact, McCain may be paying Obama an inadvertent compliment by alleging he has such influence in this area.
Both candidates have energy proposals to reduce U.S. dependence on oil. Obama's was first, and its centerpiece is a 10-year, $150 billion spending plan focusing on clean coal technology, further development of plug-in hybrid cars, commercialization of wind and solar power, and other measures.
McCain's, which is called the Lexington Project, includes building 45 new nuclear power plants; offering a $300 million prize for major advancement of low-cost, plug-in hybrid or electric car technology; and "encouraging the market" in wind, hydro and solar power. Both he and Obama would cut use of fossil fuels to combat climate change.
Lousy Linkage Redux
The ad comes full circle as the narrator tells us, "One man knows we must now drill more in America and rescue our family budgets." Let us reiterate our earlier point that opening up the OCS for drilling now wouldn't have much impact on supply or prices until 2030, according to the government. So forget about rescuing "our family budgets." In 22 years, it'll be other families' budgets – maybe our children's – that will be at issue.
McCain even acknowledged as much in late June when, after saying that drilling would have a positive effect on prices in the short term, he backtracked and said he believed it would have a beneficial "psychological impact."
That seems to have slipped his mind.
===============
McCain admits Iraq is about Oil:
Monday, July 21, 2008
Sunday, July 20, 2008
"It's All In Your Head"
John McCain: "It's All In Your Head"
We've been listening to John McCain and George Bush talk about the economy, and we've noticed a pattern: they keep saying the problems are all in our heads.
We've been listening to John McCain and George Bush talk about the economy, and we've noticed a pattern: they keep saying the problems are all in our heads.
Maliki Endorses Obama's Iraq Timeline in Huge Blow for McCain, Bush
Maliki Endorses Obama's Iraq Timeline in Huge Blow for McCain, Bush
By Tom Hayden, Huffington Post. Posted July 19, 2008
In a stunning diplomatic breakthrough for Barack Obama, Iraq's prime minister yesterday endorsed the Democratic candidate's 16-month timeline for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq.
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki endorsed the Obama approach in a July 18 interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, just as President Bush and Sen. John McCain were touting a vague new commitment to a "horizon" for withdrawal. The New York Times did not report the Maliki statement in its July 19 edition.
Here is Maliki's statement, delivered as Obama's visit to the region was beginning:
By Tom Hayden, Huffington Post. Posted July 19, 2008
In a stunning diplomatic breakthrough for Barack Obama, Iraq's prime minister yesterday endorsed the Democratic candidate's 16-month timeline for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq.
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki endorsed the Obama approach in a July 18 interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, just as President Bush and Sen. John McCain were touting a vague new commitment to a "horizon" for withdrawal. The New York Times did not report the Maliki statement in its July 19 edition.
Here is Maliki's statement, delivered as Obama's visit to the region was beginning:
"Whoever is thinking about the shorter term [for withdrawal] is closer to reality. Artificially extending the stay of U.S. troops would cause problems ... As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned… Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic ... Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
