What do you think of our current President?

[mkloby]

I read an article from a financial firm arguing that trading in oil futures has a lot to do with the over-inflated price of oil, rather than simply supply and demand. Some are predicting a major crash in the price of oil in the coming years.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by ToughOmbre

Liberals like yourself always stay in character by personally attacking those that they don't agree with (BTW, I know who "Sam" Grant was/is, not many refer to him by that name anymore).

In your first post you called a member an idiot, in your third you belittle my forum name. Uninformed? Instead of giving us a history lesson on US Grant's nickname (which is quite irrelevant to this thread), why don't you do a little research on "ToughOmbre". I'll give you a hint, google 90th Infantry Division, then D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, battle stars, Patton and finally Distinguished Unit Citation. You might learn something.

Agreed. It allways seems to be posters like him that revert straight to the insults and personal attacks.

One more personal attack like his above and he will never post here again, that I can promise you...

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Ham920

. I also believe there is collusion between the Bushes, the Cheneyes and foreign oil.

I'm not a fan of Bush but at the same time Hussein had to go - for what ever reason. Statements like that ruin your creditability and in essence make you look like a bigger idiot than you've already displayed.

If the shoe fits? In your case it fits like a glove....

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by pbfoot

especially when maintained by Texas ANG when they visited us , our mechanics held them back because of condition they were amazed at the poor maintainence. the excercise i 'm taklking about was called Survivor, aside from the flying the main attraction was $5.00for all the lobster you could eat , every ADG was represented the Texas ADG unit rep was the squadron commander he flew home commercial until the contaminated hydraulics on both aircraft had been cleaned

CAF mechanics held back a US aircraft? Who and when???

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

CAF mechanics held back a US aircraft? Who and when???

in the late 70's the techs pointed it out to the ANG pilots and they left them for our guys to clean up with the help of a team sent up from another 102 unit, if I recall correctly they had corroded lines

[renrich]

Dealing with reality rather than with perception seems to me the sensible way to go. The reality was that our economy was in a recession in 2000 during the election. The media did not make a big deal about it, as they do today, because it would have hurt Gore, their preferred candidate. The facts are that when W Bush took office in Jan., 2001, the economy was in a recession. In Sept. 2001, the WTC took place and the economy took another hit and a little later big hurricanes hit the Gulf and Florida. All of these had a negative effect on the economy. Bush got a tax cut through congress and tried to address the social security problem but failed because congress would not act. Then we had 52 consecutive months of job growth. That was a record. I would like to know what Clinton did to cause the recession in 2000. I would like to know what Bush did to cause a recession we may or may not be in now. The adjustable rate mortgages which are causing a lot of the foreclosures first began in California in the 80s. George Bush was not even the Texas governor then. I would like to know what the new president should do to "fix' the economy. I would like to know how Bush and Cheney and their "buddies" benefitted from the Iraq invasion and how do oil prices figure into that situation. There is more oil being produced in Iraq today than there was before under Saddam. Shouldn't that be a good thing. Speaking of oil prices, the price of oil and gasoline are just now hovering at about the same level, adjusted for inflation, that they were during the Carter administration. Someone please educate me on the reality of the situation. Let's deal with facts, not perception. PB, the article you posted is typical left wing garbage. I have said it on this forum before but think it bears repeating, Truman approval ratings were rock bottom(I believe 28%) during his last year in office. Many of the "experts" were rating him the worst president ever. Now in hindsight many "experts" are rating him one of the best presidents. Judging W Bush today is a fruitless exercise. As for calling him a war monger, he hardly qualifies. He and Tony Blair(seems we have forgotten him) saw something that needed to be done, did it, and paid the political price. If FDR had gotten us into the war to help Britain without the impetus of PH, he too, probably would have paid a political price in 1944. All presidents have to dissemble, prevaricate and mislead in order to accomplish foreign policy initiatives that are politically unpopular. FDR did plenty of that during the period before Dec. 7. Polk used the excuse that Mexico was invading Texas to get a war in order to extend our borders to the Pacific. Who is to say that was not a good decision for most involved. Even though there were more motives than deposing Saddam involved in the Iraq invasion, who is to say that Iraq is not better off today than it was prior to the War.. Who is to say that confronting Islamic terrorists over there and killing them is not better than dealing with them here. Ever notice that the liberal media and the dem party never mention we have had no successful domestic terrorist events since 9-11? As for those who say the Iraqis can't get their act together forming a government, I refer you to American history. We spent seven years under a document called The Articles of Confedration and then junked that for something later called The Constitution. Do we expect Iraq to do better? This is a rambling post but judging Bush because one does not like his language or his looks makes me place little credibility in the critic's post. As far as Clinton is concerned, I don't judge him because of infidelity toward his wife. I expect that many of us on this forum would have to plead guilty to that. Where I judge him is to use the oval office for an indiscretion with a young lady(almost a minor) who works for him showing a lack of class, good judgment and a monstrous arrogance. To boot, he perjured himself before a grand jury. One can not trust a man who conducts himself in that manner. Would anyone do a handshake deal with that person. He and his wife are trash!

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by pbfoot

in the late 70's the techs pointed it out to the ANG pilots and they left them for our guys to clean up with the help of a team sent up from another 102 unit, if I recall correctly they had corroded lines

102s went away in 1976 - we're probably talking F-106s. Corrosion on fluid lines is wide open - how much, how deep and what type? It was probably a little more to it than that but I could tell you with the exception of flying aircraft a little older, ANG units are under the same requirements as USAF folks and have to pass the same IG inspections - with that said, things got pretty bad in the late 70 when Carter was president

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

102s went away in 1976 - we're probably talking F-106s. Corrosion on fluid lines is wide open - how much, how deep and what type? It was probably a little more to it than that but I could tell you with the exception of flying aircraft a little older, ANG units are under the same requirements as USAF folks and have to pass the same IG inspections - with that said, things got pretty bad in the late 70 when Carter was president

The US military was not as skilled then as today , I don't believe the trades were all they could be back then. I almost positive about the aircraft but am not in the least perfect they were out of Ellington or Ellsworth.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Ham920

I’m not a Democrat and I’m not a Republican; I’ve voted for both parties when I thought they had the best candidate. I too respect the military and support our troops, but I don’t think one America soldier’s life is worth 10,000 barrels of oil in Iraq and I don’t think we should force the rest of the world to accept our way of living and/or our form of government. I also believe there is collusion between the Bushes, the Cheneyes and foreign oil.

Are you a guy that deals primarily in facts or adhere to a lower standard of evidence? Just out of curiosity why do you 'believe' collusion?

The United States is a unique country with a unique history and our way of life is not necessarily suitable for the entire world. Its time we realized that and stop thinking that we have a monopoly on how the world should be governed.

Do you have an example in mind? Say, another Republic that 'we' imposed on another soverign nation? What form of Government exists in Germany, Japan or Italy? Does it look like ours? What form of government existed in North Korea after WWII versus South Korea? or all the Iron Curtain countries? what did those governments look like?

Maybe the common thread for those that we touch is that we would like the people to have an elected form of representation and a codified set of laws and a justice system that is built around the laws? Stand guilty of that..

It’s Vietnam all over again. Stop communism over there before it gets here. Stop the terrorists over there before they come here; same thing, same thinking.

I would speculate you equate the threat low and the response ill suited to your delicate nature? You think the asymetrical threat posed by well organized, well funded people with no scruples regarding the taking of human life to advance a religious and political structure harmonized to THEIR world view is acceptable?

Where do you draw the "line".. if such a bold and otherwise downtrodden 'spiritualists' were successful at acquiring say one or two real nuclear weapons, some to many regimental command level Sov CBW weaponized 122mm rounds and say set one off in Seattle, LA, (please at least ONE in SF) and threatened more - what would you think then? And how would you deal with it?

Would you remotely consider 'waterboarding' a suspect or would you call the ACLU?

We were wrong then and we are wrong today.

Were we wrong in South Korea? or Taiwan - who do not have a Republic.. or wrong in West Germany, or wrong in Afghanistan?

Bush and his pals played fast and loose with the Truth; all smoke and mirrors. Cheney goes around repeating the assertion that Saddam Hussein had close ties to al Qaeda, a claim that has been denied by every U.S. intelligence agency.

You recognize the difference between 'close ties' and 'affiliation of convenience and plausible deniability?" You recognize that Mr Tenant, who was CIA Director for both Clinton and Bush felt otherwise, and that Ms Clinton, Albright, Cohen, Kerry' Kennedy et, al were supporting Mr Clinton in his contententions that Iraq had MWD, that Iraq had a tie to the Bush Sr assasination attempt, and that they Alleged ties between Al qaida and Iraq intelligence force?You have a notion that Bush lied but Clinton(s) told the truth when they said he had WMD and associations with Al qaida?

He describes the effort to bring stability and democracy to Iraq as a “successful endeavor” while there is still no stable functioning democracy over there and after years of training, the Iraq armed forces still can’t keep order in their own country. The real irony is that our occupation of Iraq and the downfall of Hussein have given al Qaeda a foothold in a county where terrorist organizations had never a foothold.

True enough, although the swing recently has been the Sunni insurgents 'having enough' of the mindless violence agianst all Iraqi's.

Saddam had methods and a convenient 'lack of codified laws' and was ruthless enough to weed out most home grown terrorists and gas the citizens he didn't like? What is your Plan?

I can see most of you are set in your ways and unwilling to have your way of thinking challenged. Too bad, re-thinking your positions is the only way you can be sure that your thinking is on target and that your open mind is not just a hole in your head. Blindly supporting the President because he is the President doesn’t make you a Patriotic American. Challenging the government is how our government was formed in the first place. Challenging governmet make it stronger and is actually more Patriotic. For example, Thomas Jefferson believed the government should be overthrown every 20 years.

And your belief? more often, less? what form of govenrment next?

Challenges and points of view should often be accompanied by logic and facts if you want a civil debate. You don't seem to have either in attempting to persuade others". Try the big lie and repeat it - often. There is a party in our two party system that is fairly talented at that tactic..



Finally, Bush in his younger days characterized himself as a “drunk.” Not my term - his. As for coward – you may be right, that was too strong (thanks for challenging my thinking), but let’s face it he didn’t go anywhere near where the fighting was and certainly didn't volunteer to go there. We can also thank George W for the splendid job he has done with the economy. He started with a surplus and gave all the money back to his rich friends. That away to think ahead George. Like maybe we might need the surplus in the future to pay for social security or medicare? And by the way Osama bin Laden, the father of 9/11, is still on the loose. Yeah, we got Saddam – same old smoke and mirrors mentality that you all fell for. Saddam didn't bomb the Trade Center -it was bin Laden and he cant' stop laughing at how the Republicans blamed Saddam Hussein, sold that concpet to a gullible American popluace, and re-elected Bush - Mr. "Mission Accomplished."

If you had equal disdain for say, Mr Clinton who ran from military service and was only able to run for President based on a pardon by Mr. Carter, or could explain why a party could crucify Lott for praising Strom Thurmond for mhis service in the Senate, on the basis that Thurmand was believed in KKK, but are silent on the esteemed 'gentleman' Sen Byrd from West Virginia who was in the KKK.. and on and on - you might have credibility for your tirades - if you had some facts.

You seem 'one dimensional' and have managed to insult everyone with your style, then compounded the style with just poor logic, resorting to personal attacks on both the President and VP, as well as others for being close minded - because they don't agree with you? Now THAT is open minded isn't it?.

Just out of curiosity, name two people in the US Senate whom you think wake up and do what they believe best (not saying it is best in your opinion) for the country every day - that compare in a similar way to McCain and Lieberman..

[Njaco]

He won't be back. Took his shots, accused us of close-minded debate and then takes-off, refusing to discuss it.

Give us a real challenge.

[ToughOmbre]

Yeah, he's a "drive-by" to be sure.

TO

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by mkloby

I read an article from a financial firm arguing that trading in oil futures has a lot to do with the over-inflated price of oil, rather than simply supply and demand. Some are predicting a major crash in the price of oil in the coming years.

It is complicated to say the least.

You have one set of traders that work for the refiners. Essentially, they have to get the right 'types' of crude, in exactly the right supply to arrive at the right time to produce what that refinery wishes to produce. Jet Fuel and asphalt are two widely divergent products and require different processes and feed stocks when they are being produced.

BTW - the 'boycott' emails circulating in the internet are all about attacking this weak link in the supply chain. If you don't buy refined products, they either must shift from one supply (i.e unleaded) to another (diesel) that is still being sold in some way - if the refinery is set up for it...otherwise they have to stop buying..

The second block is Producers, on the merc to sell futures on their production and secure a price for it. If the actual price takes off they still have to deliver at the price they negotiated in the Futures market. If it goes down they look like heroes.

Back in the 80's T. Boone Pickens sold a long term revenue stream when every one (ex cept him) in the middle 80's was sure oil would go to 40/bbl and it turned and dropped to 10-12/bbl.. but the poor bastards (refiners) that bought his $30/bbl futures, either got out at a huge loss by selling short or took the product at 30/bbl and had to compete with other refiners buying at steadily lower prices.

The last group are the wall street speculators buying and selling futures - lot of it risk weighted based on local restriction (war/politics, etc). These are the bad guys driving the price away from pure supply/demand.

If you listen to ANYBODY about prices - up or down - listen to T.Boone Pickens.

The refiners are always operating at huge pofits as long as price of crude goes up, the producers are always making a profit, up or down, as long as price above delivered cost (all in) to pipeline/shipper. As soon a scrude prices start going down and keep going down the refiners take it in the shorts unless they are out in front of the trend on buying futures.

[Njaco]

Thanks drgn

I have always noticed that whatever the contention, it is never as simple as the media make it out to be.

A little off topic but just to illustrate my point. High salaries of sports players. Everybody has a gripe about how much - in the millions - that athletes make in professional sports. And on the surface, it does appear that giving $16 million a year to somebody who throws a ball is excessive. But looking deeper you see that most sports players only last anywhere from 2 to 6 years in the game and then leave on an injury. Lifetime Medical problems pop up and all kinds of problems affect them. Granted some are paid outrageous salaries but on the whole it is warranted.

Apply that to alot of the drive-by media (sorry Rush) and the snipets played on TV news and you get the reason why the general public is out-raged against big oil, Bush, and whatever else that comes down the pike. Not many are willing to investigate deeper into an issue - byproduct of the Hurry Up Society we live in.

[renrich]

Saw on Fox last night where Obama at a public meeting accused McCain of wanting to have troops in Iraq for 100 years. A reporter(unbelievable) challenged him and said that McCain opined that we might have troops in Iraq for 100 years as long as they weren't getting killed like we have had troops in Korea for more then 50 years and troops in Germany for 60 years. Obama finally backed down. Obama also at first stated that he had never been in the church when Wright made his outrageous statements but later admitted that he had been there when some of the statements were made. Then we have Hillary making up stories about how she flew into Bosnia under fire. How many times have we heard the leaders in the democrat party, Slick Willy, Pelosi, Reid, Ted Kennedy, Schumer, Dean make statements that were patently untrue? They have said that President Bush was a liar, was stupid, uncaring or that his tax cuts only benefitted the rich. They have taken personal attacks and insults to a new low in politics. How many times have we heard President Bush make a personal attack on another politician? Is it my imagination or all democrats liars? I can only conclude that most democrats are either so power hungry that they have no scruples about playing fast and loose with the truth or that they are congenital liars. The most disturbing thing about this characteristic is that their followers swallow all this garbage without any qualms. Are they that power hungry also or are they just plain stupid? God help us!

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Njaco

Thanks drgn

I have always noticed that whatever the contention, it is never as simple as the media make it out to be.

A little off topic but just to illustrate my point. High salaries of sports players. Everybody has a gripe about how much - in the millions - that athletes make in professional sports. And on the surface, it does appear that giving $16 million a year to somebody who throws a ball is excessive. But looking deeper you see that most sports players only last anywhere from 2 to 6 years in the game and then leave on an injury. Lifetime Medical problems pop up and all kinds of problems affect them. Granted some are paid outrageous salaries but on the whole it is warranted.

Apply that to alot of the drive-by media (sorry Rush) and the snipets played on TV news and you get the reason why the general public is out-raged against big oil, Bush, and whatever else that comes down the pike. Not many are willing to investigate deeper into an issue - byproduct of the Hurry Up Society we live in.

Has anybody priced milk or Perrier or a Budweiser and compared against the price of a barrel of crude? or compared the price here vs EU?