 |
| Deep Speculation -- from Harper's Weekly 2/11/1865 |
Advocates of free markets like to point out that government regulation strangles and upsets the equilibrium that laissez-faire capitalism provides and requires in order to maintain pricing that reflects the true value of goods and services. Libertarians are staunch believers of totally unfettered capitalism, although the majority of conservatives are its primary cheerleaders also. Or so it seems.
Certainly all the saber-rattling from the United States, and Israel (the tail-that-wags-the-dog), against Iran is having an unnerving affect on the oil commodity markets around the world. Add to this the declining value of the U.S. Dollar, which dominates and is linked to the value of each barrel of crude, and not to mention manipulation by unscrupulous producers that invokes shortages and drives prices upward. Of course, as would be expected, Republicans are jumping on the bandwagon and are more than happy to blame this on the Obama Administration. But there are definitely other factors involved -- factors that have had a long-term influence on steadily rising gasoline prices over the last few years. These are factors that are unrelated to consumer demand, since demand is currently at its lowest mark in the United States since 1997.
Many people are only vaguely aware that oil prices are set by commodities traders -- speculators -- who buy and sell futures contracts on the world's commodities exchanges. These are agreements to buy or sell oil at a specific date in the future at a specific price. Buyers will use these to avoid the risks associated with the price fluctuations of oil, while sellers will attempt to lock in a price for their products. As with all financial markets, speculators use such contracts to gamble on price movements. Commodities traders can create a self-fulfilling prophecy by bidding up oil futures prices (or bidding down, selling short, and still getting rewarded handsomely). This practice adds up to 30% to the cost of a barrel of oil without adding any value to the barrel. Once this starts, it can create an asset bubble. (Sound familiar?) Unfortunately, the one who pays for this bubble -- the artificially-created pricing -- is the consumer. That's you...and that's me!
As Uyger points out, last year each family in America paid an extra $600 in fuel costs due to oil speculation -- an extra $600 that isn't related to supply and demand market forces or because of free-market competition. It was, pure and simple, just another example of how monopolistic capitalism manipulates market pricing, creating bubbles of artificially high pricing for the benefit of a few and to the detriment of the many. It is, by no other definition, market manipulation -- despite the Dodd-Frank Bill passed by the Democratic Congress that was supposedly designed to limit such abuses.
Here's an older video from last year, again by Cenk Uygur, that explains this subject even more thoroughly. It's happening again.
56 comments:
We blew our chance to nationalize the Banksters. They express their "gratitude" for the balouts by ripping us off even more.
Dave Dubya, it's becoming quite clear to me that the banksters pull the strings, while our "elected officials" talk and dance. Last September, trader Alessio Rastani stressed that "Goldman Sachs rules the world".
He's right.
Excellent post on a subject the media should be all over. But why cover that when horse-race stories are so much easier?
"Market manipulation is prohibited in the United States under Section 9(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934...The Act defines market manipulation as transactions which create an artificial price or maintain an artificial price for a tradeable security."
Has anyone told the Justice Department about this?
For some strong clues as to why this situation continues, take a look here and here.
Mr. Anderson, thanks for the links. As to be expected, the recipient lists are dominated by those who have an "R" following their name.
With Romney leading the charge for the oil & gas lobby, it lends even more credence to my prediction that this year's horse-race will be between "the trees are just the right height" candidate and Obama.
I still maintain that, in November, it'll be the incumbent by a nose.
Thanks again!
It's too bad the government won't enforce the clearly-written law from 1934. But the "why" part is no mystery. SW's two links explain it very clearly.
Do you really believe that the increase in oil prices is due to saber rattling and an unregulated market place? What about Keystone Pipeline not being allowed, what about allowing drilling to 2008 levels in Gulf Of Mexico, what about not sealing oil drilling leases to Brazil. In the world of speculation allowing any ONE of those just to START would have a downward pressure on the price of oil, just as much as "saber rattling" has to raise the price.
Tom Harper, I agree -- on all counts!
Anonymous, I noticed that you conveniently ignored and disregarded the jump in commodity investment in oil speculative markets from $13B to $300B within a five year period. A recent Forbes estimate indicates that speculation in crude oil adds over $23 to the price per barrel, and last year even Goldman Sachs warned that speculation drives oil prices and suggested that crude oil prices are increasingly determined by investors betting on which way prices are moving, rather than on economic fundamentals. You also seem to ignore that oil demand in the United States is at its lowest since 1997, and that oil production is higher now than when Bush II was president.
You also seem to ignore what I listed that would cause a decrease in the cost of fuel of Obama had done differently.
Or are you saying that Obama is in league with big oil like you said Bush II was?
Secretary of Energy Chu is on record as saying "If we can only get the price of gas up to $8 a gallon...",
Who do we blame now. BushI or Regan?
In 2008 Steven Chu, who is now secretary of energy, said: “Somehow, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to levels in Europe.” Mr. Chu and his boss think that ideally Americans ought to be paying around $10 a gallon for gasoline. And President Obama himself stated that a gradual increase to European levels would be a good thing.
Toward that end, a new Environmental Protection Agency proposal requires the sulfur content in gasoline to drop from 30 parts per million to 10 parts per million, and according to a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson from six U.S. senators (four Republicans, two Democrats), this mandate will raise gasoline prices by 12 to 25 cents a gallon. The dream of European fuel prices gets a little closer to reality.
Democrat National Committee chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., said recently that “the Republican field ... thinks that we just need to remain tethered and dependent on foreign oil because all they would do is more and more drilling.” This Alice-in-Wonderland assessment assumes that drilling for our own oil will keep us dependent on foreign oil. So much for Democrat energy policy.
Oil production has increased of late, “higher than it’s been in eight years,” the White House boasts. But this occurred in spite of, rather than because of, the Obama energy policy. Remember that Mr. Obama declared most offshore areas off limits, substantially decreased oil and gas leases in the Rockies, and rejected the Keystone XL pipeline. The increase in production comes from wells on private property where Mr. Obama cannot stop it, and that production began under George W. Bush.
Time to change the subject?
What change the subject from lies to truth?
Mr. Chu and his boss think that ideally Americans ought to be paying around $10 a gallon for gasoline.
Someone neglected to read past his cherry picked quote.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122904040307499791.html
"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
But Mr. Obama has dismissed the idea of boosting the federal gasoline tax, a move energy experts say could be the single most effective step to promote alternative energies and temper demand. Mr. Obama said Sunday that a heightened gas tax would be a "mistake" because it would put "additional burdens on American families right now."
There's no such thing as the "Democrat National Committee". either. Republi-cons don't know this... and don't care.
No wonder they hate education. Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Collectivism merely provides excuses for individuals, removing their responsibility for their own lives. It provides a fake persona, known as "the people" and "society". Except the people and society cannot tell you what they think or want, so it is conveniently left to a political class to "redistribute" the individuals wealth - as a clear incentive for the productive individual to stop making money and locking the poor into a cycle of reliance on handouts.
Margaret Thatcher hit a raw nerve when she pointed out that there was no such thing as society. There are only individuals, and if we prevent the individual from flourishing in whatever way they want then we die as a species.
I too would laugh at the old dinosaurs like Dave Dubya that cling to their marxist ideologies, if it wasn't for the new generation like the OWS crowd growing up spouting the same idealistic stupidity that have been proven to fail time and time again.
The mistake we made after the fall of comunism was to think that the war had ended. It hadn't. Cultural Socialism has been waging a war of social engineering in leftist strongholds, such as the media, the entertainment industry and unfortunately, the classrooms and university lecture halls.
Pardon me for commenting on, not with, this troll, but since he called me a dinosaur, that was too much. I’m not even a Marxist. He clearly wants to distract us from the subject and deceive us with his extremism, while showing his own reptilian cold-bloodedness.
Somebody must have been in Hungary for too long over the past thirty years, having missed the incredible, vast redistribution of wealth trickling up to the economic elites in this country.
“No such thing as society”? Right, in the sense that sociopaths have zero concern for society or the people in it, apart from imposing their will over others. No such thing as “the people” either? But a corporation is a person, I suppose.
Collectivism merely provides excuses for individuals, removing their responsibility for their own lives.
Collectivism merely provides critical components of civilized society, like education, public safety and health care. Collectivism merely provides protection of our air and water. Collectivism merely provides roads and infrastructure, and a legal system to protect everyone. Does collectivism merely remove the responsibility of a person to keep his house from burning down by providing for a fire department? The utter tyranny and horror of “collectivism” must be crushed at all costs. Let them burn alive and take responsibility for themselves for a change.
Except the people and society cannot tell you what they think or want,
Not if you listen to only FOX (R) and talk radio. People tell us a lot of things. Poll after poll after poll shows that most Americans want to keep safety nets, unemployment insurance, Medicare and Social Security. Poll after poll after poll tells us most Americans want to end the Bush tax cuts for millionaires.
Ah, their trusty old favorites, and the “Media is liberal”, and the “Liberals are commies” lies. This extremism always reflects the core of fascism, of course.
Who do they hate? Advocates of democracy and the working class are targets. Journalism and education and science they wish suppressed are demonized because they are out of the extreme Right’s control. They don’t want you to listen to scientists, journalists and educators. We must trust their word alone. They want everyone to listen only to their extremist propaganda.
The mistake we made after the fall of Hitler and Tojo was to think fascism was defeated.
Poll after poll after poll shows that most Americans feel the rich are taxed enough. In fact when asked what should be the highest tax rate the amount given the most is 30%, which is 5% lower than the current rate.
But in the world of collectivism, the state knows better.
The troll just contradicted himself again.
Either "the people and society cannot tell you what they think or want", or they can.
Now he says they can. And even in his imaginary polls, they clearly want Willard (15%) Romney and his fellow aristocrats to pay twice the effective rate of taxes than they do now.
And they wonder why we call them dishonest...
Which is it? Can the allegedly fictitious "people" tell us what they want, or not? The troll wants it both ways.
Once again they clearly exemplify the Orwellian concept of doublethink.
That is the world of totalitarians where the authoritarians know better. Authoritarian followers are very much like a cult. They prove it again and again.
sutter sputter, stammer, our polls are the good ones, yours are the bad ones..and I know because I'm so well versed in everything, so don't believe any thing unless I put my brand of "it's ok" on it. And any thing that goes against what I say say is from Fox (R) news...trust me I'm a liberal.
Anonymous, Crazy Hungarian, or whatever name you're going by today, it seems you've been caught in a ton of lies...again. So many, as a matter fact, I don't know where to begin, and truthfully, don't care to take my valuable and limited time to respond and reply to your falsities. As I've warned you, on several past occasions when you've attempted to dump your trollish and off-topic remarks on this blog, I will not put up with it. Tom Degan may, and that's his prerogative, but I won't, so go visit Tom. I think I hear him calling you...
Dave Dubya, it looks like the troll followed me home. As is always the case, he won't, or can't, face-off on topics such as I've posted here, because he knows the truth will always prevail, so he diverts the discussion to his usual false reich-wing talking points -- which always end up in some Marxist rant of some sort or another.
Lunacy prevails in the reich-wing!
Someone got nailed. Looks like a sore loser, too.
Reality means nothing to the radical Right. Authoritarian Cult beliefs are everything.
The Republican Brain: Why Even Educated Conservatives Deny Science -- and Reality
http://www.alternet.org/story/154252/the_republican_brain%3A_why_even_educated_conservatives_deny_science_--_and_reality/?page=entire
So, Dave Dubya, do you think "our" troll would be what Chris Mooney refers to as a "smart idiot"?
Me neither...
This is a test post to see if it makes it through cyberspace to the blog. All my comments lately disappear into thin air without showing as a comment. I didn't realize I was so feared that I needed to be censored !!
Your test post arrived... ;-)
Welcome back to my humble little abode. Pour your favorite libation, take a load off your feet, and stay a little...or stay a lot.
"It provides a fake persona, known as 'the people' and 'society.'"
Crazy Hungarian got one thing right: his moniker.
GM halts production of Volt citing slow, or should we say shockingly piss poor sales. GM blames media for poor publicity.
Liberals blame the Tea Party, banks, speculators, and Justice Thomas. But the real reason is the recent discovery and announcement by President Obama of yet another green energy source, alge. The newest renewable energy source is the stuff that grows in ponds. Have you noticed how the futures price for crude has nose dived? Look at the average price of a gallon is down to 10 cents per gallon before the federal, state and local taxes are included.
Rumor has it the UAW is trying to organize alge growers, the possible results being an immediate increase in the cost of alge, and production slowdowns over working conditions in the swamp. Ed Schultz to report soon on this maltreatment of the working man in America, blaiming the Tea Party, Republicans and Justice Thomas. Stay tuned to this site for monthly insane liberal updates.
Just the Falsehoods!, I see that since I've disrupted your ability to comment anonymously or with any one of your multitude of monikers, you've decided to troll me with the following...
"GM halts production of Volt citing slow, or should we say shockingly piss poor sales. GM blames media for poor publicity."
Yes, for five weeks. Production is scheduled to resume in late April. Please amuse me, and explain to me your point, and how this relates to the posted topic.
"Liberals blame the Tea Party, banks, speculators, and Justice Thomas."
Most do, I suppose, considering that the Tea Party is a creation of the elite (the 1%), designed to cater to the interests of the elite (the 1%), and you already know my feelings regarding multinational corporations (which include the banking cartel) and the tool they've installed into the judicial system, Clarence Thomas. He, along with Alito, Scalia, and Roberts.
"But the real reason is the recent discovery and announcement by President Obama of yet another green energy source, alge [blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...]"
First of all, if you don't know the proper spelling of a word, please look it up or at least use spell-check. It's spelled "algae".
You claim to be college-educated. That's hard to believe.
Secondly, algae has many beneficial environmental and industrial uses. Again, please explain what this has to do with the topic of the post. By the way, futures may be down, but it's temporary. Fluctuations are normal, and the current long-term trend will continue its climb. But, from what I've read, by the end of the second quarter it'll head in the opposite direction. The speculators will bet short and make a killing in that direction, also (as I alluded to in my post), lending credence to my premise that supply and demand (free market) mechanisms are totally a joke.
"Stay tuned to this site for monthly insane liberal updates."
Yes, liberal...or liberalism... meaning freedom from fear, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion (and from religion, if that is one's prerogative), and as FDR added in 1941, freedom from want (or need). But mostly, as the opening paragraph of this blog attests, freedom from corporate rule -- meaning freedom from undemocratic rule.
Come on JG, you got to admit it's funny that GM blames the media for poor sales of the Volt, even with all the incentives that the GOVT offers potential buyers to buy one.
And you mean to tell me that you don't think it's a hoot that Obama, the guy both of us will not vote for in NOV,. has a new energy source, algae, a.k.a. pond scum? Sorry about the mis-spelling of the 1st energy source that truly GREEN.
"Yes, liberal...or liberalism... meaning freedom from fear, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion (and from religion, if that is one's prerogative), and as FDR added in 1941, freedom from want (or need)." I would agree with your list except for the FDR addition, it's not in the Constitution. But what you did forget was Freedom from a govt that spends our money on cars that no one wants. Freedom from a govt that forces us to have health insurance or pay a fine (tax). Freedom from a govt that eliminates our choices in light bulbs. Freedom from a Govt that does not lie to us when caught selling guns to Drug Gangs in Mexico. Freedom from a Govt that want's to pick the winners and losers in life. Freedom from a Govt that wants us to pay $8.00 a gallon for gas.
And this should fit in on your blog's title, Freedom from a Govt who believes in Crony Corporatism.
Just the Falsehoods!, again I'll ask you, what does this (the Chevy Volt) have to do with the topic of this post? I'll answer for you: Nothing.
As far as thinking "it's a hoot" that Obama's seeking new and long-term solutions to sustainable energy options, I disagree. I actually believe it's a good idea and worth the costs. If you'll recall, people thought JFK was a fool for announcing his intention to get men to the moon and safely returned, but the technological advances and industries that spawned and benefited from this were enormous. It's something the "free market" couldn't have accomplished without government initiating it. As previously mentioned, algae already has proven and beneficial environmental and industrial uses. Maybe algae-based fuels will make fossil fuels obsolete, just as whale-oil is considered today.
Regarding FDR's list, as you might predict, I disagree with you. Possibly his "freedom from want" isn't specifically mentioned in our Constitution, but neither is the concept of corporations being legally considered to have the same protected rights as natural persons, which is the reason I write and maintain this blog. As long as the courts and the prevailing viewpoint maintain this illegal fiction, I'll continue to fight and expose the untruths surrounding it -- and those benefiting from it. Being a strict and original constitutionalist, I'd think you would be in agreement with me about this.
"Possibly",, did you say Possibly isn't specifically mentioned in our Constitution? Please, you know it doesn't.
Corporations spending their money equals free speech it is there now because the Supreme Court said it was there, just like Unions have that same freedom of speech.
Until the Court says different or an Amendment to the Constitution is passed, that is the law of the land.
I understand your anger over this, but please don't act like you don't understand/know what has to be done to effect the changes you want.
I think it's a hoot that pond sum is the new Green energy source, I just cant believe how far Obama, the guy BOTH of are not voting for will go to appease parts of his base.
Just the Falsehoods!, I believe my exact words were "Possibly his 'freedom from want' isn't specifically mentioned in our Constitution", but the point is they don't have to be. The Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause, in Article One of the U.S. Constitution, allow Congress to enact legislation that is neither expressly listed in the enumerated powers, nor expressly denied in the limitations on Congress. That's the reason the terminology doesn't have to explicitly express "freedom from want".
But, why would I expect you to know this?
Oh, and by the way, I've done a complete about-face in my feelings about Obama, and will be voting for him in November's election. Interestingly, and metaphorically, it is because he's attempting to create something useful and valuable from "pond scum" -- ironically, something he has had to push back against, and fight, since his first day in office. Thanks to you, you've opened my eyes on the useful benefits of algae. With his clear vision, and your help in pointing it out to me, I'll cast my vote for the man who sees and recognizes the benefits of having science in our lives.
Thanks for your help!
What, Obama wants to use Limbaugh for an energy source? Ohhh, pond scum... That's a different kind.
You know, I was ready to not vote for Obama, for all his usual pandering to corporate/militarist elements. Now that he has phoned the woman bullied and insulted by Limbaugh, I see he's a gentleman and a nice guy, so I have decided to support him.
Looks like Obama has Rush and Just the FOX(R) to thank for two more votes.
Another reason to vote for Obama has just occured to me. Just imagine the lunacy that will surely erupt from the wackos who are already suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome.
The show will be spectacular. I will vote for Obama just to see that.
See, Dave, there's a lesson here for Just the Falsehoods!: Trolling never pays.
He should have quit while he was ahead.
(Maybe he'll quit now... ;-)
How much per gallon do you think the EPA's regulations add to the cost of a gallon of gas? Recall in 2008 your guy Obama saying that it was not a good time to go into the coal mining industry, due to new regulations he was going to impose?
How will local, state and federal govt make up the tax revenue short fall as the the use decreases due to higher prices at the pump?
I don't feel that the higher price of oil can be blamed entirely on Wall Street. It is a world market, if China increases demand for oil (signing agreement with Canada to buy their oil. Canada first offer to us, via Keystone) then the world market will react accordingly. Are you suggesting that the world market should be controlled by some central planning organization?
Just the Falsehoods!, you countered with...
"How much per gallon do you think the EPA's regulations add to the cost of a gallon of gas?"
I don't really care. I'm more concerned with what no regulations would mean to my health.
"Recall in 2008 your guy Obama saying..."
Sorry, he's not "my guy". As I've said to you, more times than I care to count, he's a corporatist, as are 95% of the modern-day Democratic Party, and 100% of the Republican Party. None of these people represent my best interests, nor the interests of the vast majority of Americans. They represent the banking cartel and the multinational corporations. Period. How many times do I need to spell this out for you?
"I don't feel that the higher price of oil can be blamed entirely on Wall Street."
Neither do I -- but about 30% of the barrel's increase can be attributed to their speculation.
"Are you suggesting that the world market should be controlled by some central planning organization?"
No, because it already is. It's shared collectively by OPEC, the collusion of Big Oil, and the manipulation by oil speculators.
"Sorry, he's not "my guy".\
Does this mean JG is not supporting Obama for another 4 years?
The cost of oil is shared collectively by OPEC, the collusion of Big Oil, and the manipulation by oil speculators. But President Obama has nothing to do with the price of oil but when President Bush was in office, he shared responsibility for oil prices, right?
Just the Falsehoods!, you replied with...
"Does this mean JG is not supporting Obama for another 4 years?"
To my own dismay, primarily because I live in what's to be, again, a pivotal swing-state, I'll probably cast my ballot for the one who I think will do the least amount of damage in the next four years.
"But President Obama has nothing to do with the price of oil but when President Bush was in office, he shared responsibility for oil prices, right?
Please...direct me to where I claimed Bush was responsible for high oil prices. I never recall making such a statement, or anything similar. However I do recall, either before or immediately after the unilateral invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq, Bush did imply that lower market prices for oil would be the norm. I don't believe that ever materialized. So, in that sense, I guess it could be said he was responsible for higher prices, since what he said never occurred.
Another point worthy of mention; Bush was (and is) a huge friend of Big Oil. Undoubtedly, it was the whole reason for the Iraqi invasion and occupation. It was a gift to his (and Cheney's) Big Oil buddies. It's what's called crony capitalism, and Bush was the master of it! Now, that's a fact!
Another point worthy of mention; Bush was (and is) a huge friend of Big Oil. Undoubtedly, it was the whole reason for the Iraqi invasion and occupation. It was a gift to his (and Cheney's) Big Oil buddies. It's what's called crony capitalism, and Bush was the master of it! Now, that's a fact!
KOOL AID!! SIP YOUR KOOL AID HERE
JG,
When will we ever get our facts straight?
Since Just the FOX(R) knows these are completely false....
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/070508b.html
Ray Hunt, the Texas oil man who landed a controversial oil production deal with Iraq’s Kurdistan regional government, has enjoyed close political and business ties with Vice President Dick Cheney dating back a decade – and to the Bush family since the 1970s.
And:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/07/17/cheney-s-oil-maps-and-the-iraq-war/
The Judicial Watch press release states that these released documents by the Energy Task Force chaired by Vice-President Cheney "contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts." The documents are dated March 2001.
And since:
It was obviously true when Bush said Saddam had very dangerous “nukular aluminum tubes”.
And since:
As Dick said, "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." (August 26, 2002) and "And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." (March 16, 2003)
...Then the obvious reason we invaded Iraq was, as Sarah Palin said, “Because Saddam Hussein attacked us on 9/11”.
No koolade there. No sir, you betcha.
Oh, what a surprise, its DD to the rescue of JG again again. Yawn.
Just the Falsehoods!, you obviously acquiesced to the truthfulness of Dave Dubya's and my assertions with the following...
"Oh, what a surprise, its DD to the rescue of JG again again."
No, I prefer to call it one rational human being confirming the truthfulness and reality of another rational human being's observations.
You're living in a bubble, Just the Falsehoods! -- like most conservatives and others who refuse to see and acknowledge the truth for what it is.
You bore me. Please, go hang out on Tom Degan's blog. Recite your ridiculous musings over there.
Yawn. The reflex of those less than conscious expresses denial of reality, utterly shredded by facts.
Nobody here needs rescue, except Just The FOX(R). Cultists cannot comprehend their need of rescue because their indoctrination demands they reject everything contrary to their beliefs. Every source of information not coming from their leaders is to be dismissed. Science, education, journalism must all be shunned as the voices of liberalism. Their truth comes only from their masters.
We kindly present reasonable evidence of the world outside their indoctrination. We offer information that helps free our minds from the dogma and deceptions of corporatocracy and helps open our minds to political manipulations by the avaricious aristocracy and Big Money power players.
We offer reality that the cult must deny. Their minds cannot be opened without cult level deprogramming.
Remember, millions of Americans are still brainwashed with Obama the Muslim, Obama the ant-Christ, and Obama the Communist being clung to as religious-like beliefs.
The cult is a threat to the interests of most Americans. Democracy and freedom are poisoned by the cult madness of the radical Right.
Ironically we’re here to rescue Just The FOX(R), and the poor wretch can only see us the enemy.
Dave Dubya, they certainly have the distinctive attributes of a cult, don't they? It would amaze me if they weren't the subject of various sociological studies regarding mind control and coercive persuasion. As I've mentioned before, Goebbels would be proud.
It's almost as if we're not experiencing the same economic circumstances, reading the same history, or hearing and viewing the same current or recently past phenomena.
"obviously acquiesced to the truthfulness of Dave Dubya's and my assertions"
Maybe I would if either of you ever posted a truthful assertion.
Exhibit "A" of the cult mentality:
Maybe I would if either of you ever posted a truthful assertion.
Nothing anyone else says, apart from his leaders, can possibly be true to a cultist.
Please DD, surely you can do better than that?
NO CORPORATE RULE, (unless they are liberal corporations, then they are just fine)
George Soros, T. Boone Pickens, Kevin G. Douglas and companies under their control stand to reap the rewards of billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidies contained in a Democratic-sponsored measure set for a vote this week.
The legislation, authored by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), would amend the much-ballyhooed highway bill to include the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions act, or NATGAS act. The act would provide subsidies for individuals, corporations and public entities that purchase natural gas vehicles or build natural gas distribution facilities.
The act would subsidize three different enterprises controlled by Soros, Pickens and Douglas, who consistently rank among the most generous political donors, according to Federal Election Commission Records.
Moreover, HUMAN EVENTS has learned that one of these companies, Fuel Systems Solutions based in Santa Ana, Calif., has and continues to conduct business, through its foreign subsidiaries, with customers in Iran, according to the company’s U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The company acknowledges in those filings that tougher international economic sanctions levied in light of that nation’s civilian nuclear program may adversely affect its Iranian-based revenues in 2012, as such measures have in the past.
Douglas is a key shareholder in Fuel Systems, and he is the largest individual investor in Westport Innovations, a Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada-based supplier of natural gas engine systems and retrofit kits. Westport’s investors also include Soros Fund Management, an investment vehicle of the Soros family. Westport’s board previously included T. Boone Pickens, who currently owns Clean Energy Fuels Corporation, a Houston-based supplier of natural gas.
Fuel Systems, Westport and Clean Energy Fuels constitute what Robert Brown, a stock analyst with Craig-Hallum Capital in Minneapolis who specializes in the energy sector, referred to as “the big three” of the natural gas-powered automation arena in North America. The companies are all relatively small in terms of revenues and considered speculative as stock investments, but the NATGAS act would allow them to profit from their research, design and development.
Clean Energy Fuels supplies liquefied natural gas (LNG) and compressed natural gas (CNG), and specializes in the development of natural gas distribution platforms. Westport and Fuel Systems offer engine and fueling systems for vehicles that run on CNG, an alternative to gasoline, and LNG, an alternative to diesel.
Brown said that all three companies will profit handsomely on passage of the NATGAS act and that all three will be harmed should Congress scuttle the Menendez Amendment.
Pickens, Soros, Douglas fund NATGAS act proponents
The three investors and their affiliates are on record as financially supporting proponents of the NATGAS act, according to FEC reports. Douglas and his wife Michelle have contributed more than $130,000 to President Barack Obama, Democrats and Democratic super PACs since 2009, according to FEC records, including to Nat Gas act supporter Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.).
Soros’ history of Democratic financial support is well known, such as $1.5 million to MoveOn.org from 2003 and 2004. In 2011, Soros gave $175,000 to the House Majority PAC and the Majority PAC, two super PACs whose donations have come mostly from American labor unions, according to FEC records. He has also given broadly to Democratic committees since 2009.
This is where JG or DD attack the source instead of checking to see if the source is correct.
So, Just the Falsehoods!, please explain how this (your copy-and-paste of an article supposedly lifted from the CBS website) has caused the recent jump in gasoline prices.
This is not related to the subject, so I will delete your article dump (and any similar dumps). If you have something to say, please start your own blog and say it! I'm not going to contribute to being your sounding-board.
Interestingly, isn't it ironic that you rail against the subsidization of American companies by government, yet you don't see the same "subsidization" occurring here (or on Dave's or Tom's blogs) when you dump articles not written by you, and expect us to be the medium for your viewpoints?
I refuse to accept that role. Create your own damn blog! (If you can. I don't believe you know how. ;-)
How liberal of you Jeff's Jockstrap, threats of censorship if you don't like what you read, cause it's your own "dammed blog".
"article supposedly lifted from the CBS website" Did you check out the source, NO. It's CBS , not FOX.
You have no problem using an "older video from last year" to support your position, but because it's your "dammed blog", you can do what you want. How liberal of you.
Just the Falsehoods!, no you're wrong! It isn't censorship at all. I'm not stopping you from making your point, any point at all, because you're as free to use Blogger and create your own blog, just as I have done. I'm not stopping you, and Google's not stopping you. The only impediment is yourself.
In the free market of thoughts and ideas, and opinions on issues, you're free to express yourself through Blogger -- just as anyone else. But you're too lazy, and refuse to work and be creative on your own, and instead expect free handouts from people who have developed blogs such as Tom Degan, Dave Dubya, myself and probably countless others. You expect us to carry you and be the willing forum, and to shoulder the load.
Well, I'm tired of carrying you! Get off your ass and create and develop your own blog, like all hard-working bloggers who wish to express themselves have done! Get off the "blogger-dole" and do something with yourself! Quit being a "Blogger Queen"!
[This reeks with the irony of your own unyielding convictions, doesn't it?]
Dear(may I call you Dear?)Jeff's Jockstrap,
"In the free market of thoughts and ideas, and opinions on issues, you're free to express yourself through Blogger"
Yes as long as I don't express my ideas on your blog.. After all, by doing so I might just prove that your liberal talking points are wrong and we cant have that can we?
If my cuts & pastes are wrong, prove so. The question is why is my sharing my idea as expressed by someone else such a crime on your blog? You do it all the time.
Here just a FEW quotes on this thread that posters have cut and pasted.
S.W.Anderson 3:30 a.m. does he ever sleep?
Anonymous 3:52 PM EST
Dave Dubya 3:40 PM EST
You want my view, I'd give it too you but you then request I support my position with sources. When I give you sources, you whine about my having cut and paste.
Sounds to me like you just are afraid to have anyone disagree with you and then support their position on you "dammed blog".
Just the Falsehoods!, first of all, I object to your insults.
Secondly, you never argue in good faith. For instance, your article "dump" from CBS had nothing to do with speculation and the reasons for rising oil prices. For some reason you thought you'd divert and control the discussion. That's poor etiquette and showing no respect for me or my readership.
Thirdly, when you feel the inclination to "dump", stop and ask yourself whether it relates to the topic of the post, and then, instead, provide a reference (e.g., CBS website, article title, date, etc., etc.) or, if you're inclined, a hyperlink. Do not copy-and-past the article. We're all literate and capable of following links and researching. If someone shows a continuing interest, they'll pursue it. Otherwise, no dumping allowed.
These are the main reasons I've threatened to delete your comments. It has nothing to do with your viewpoints (as odd and out-of-touch as they are to me) or your political persuasion. I actually welcome well thought-out and articulated responses -- from everyone. But when you persist in hijacking the discourse, and creating a new and totally different subject unrelated to the post (and which is primarily of interest to you, as you did with the CBS reference), that's where I draw the line.
If you so desperately want to discuss "George Soros, T. Boone Pickens, Kevin G. Douglas and companies under their control", then by all means write a blog article about them. Create your own blog and let 'er rip! Nobody's stopping you!
I've been through all of this with him before. He will ignore your words. His trolling, article dumps, changes of topic, and obliviousness to what we write continue because he hates us, and he feels morally superior to us. This is all flavored with a mean-spiritedness that is characteristic of the radical Right, e.g. “Stay tuned to this site for monthly insane liberal updates’.
Our words are ignored due to his inflexible beliefs and sense of self righteousness inculcated by his leaders.
Normally I'd say his miscomprehension, contempt and disregard for what we say would indicate he is either an asshole or an idiot.
But in his case, it is his cult indoctrination.
Yes, the resulting characteristics and behavior amount to, and are very similar to, the above personality types.
If we shared his radical Right belief system, he would be a kinder person toward us, I’m sure.
But to his cult, we are a socialist/communist threat to their fantasy ideas of what America is, or should be.
"you never argue in good faith"
Coming from someone who has no problem saying one day he will not vote for Obama and then the next that he will, I find your claim of good faith, odd.
Ha.
"Faith" to some is the "Divine right of the radical Right".
Just the Falsehoods!, who I choose, in a secret ballot, to be my elected representatives is my choice -- and my choice only. I may change my mind a thousand times, between now and November 6th, and may still not have made up my mind by the time I pull the lever. That's my prerogative, and mine only. It has nothing to do with you, or anyone else.
It also has nothing to do with arguing in good faith, and you know this, so cut the bullshit. You're well aware of what I'm speaking about.
Dave Dubya, I totally agree with you.
'who I choose, in a secret ballot"
Should voting in union elections be required to use secret ballot?
"I may change my mind a thousand times"
Flip Flop much Jeff's' JockStrap?
Ok, DD Your turn to say something, then it's Jeff's then its mine.
Just the Falsehoods!, as is customary with you, diversion of the topic is your modus operandi.
I gave you every chance to redeem yourself, but you insist on being the fool I always thought you were. This will be the end of the line for you.
Bye!
Dave Dubya, you were right!
Post a Comment