Re: Sdspringy // Jul 15, 2009 at 3:30 am

(*THUMBS UP*)

If only we all relied upon fact and reason.

(*SIGH*)

BILL

OK, Chekote, since you’re still not “getting” what I’m asking you to do in terms of reviewing Palin’s actual words, allow me to demonstrate by deconstructing Kerry’s response that you were kind enough to provide the link to. OK?

SECOND FRIGG’N PARAGRAPH –

“her promise to roll up her sleeves and tackle serious issues is followed by a column that focuses on everything but the single grave challenge that forms the basis of all of our actions: the crisis of global climate change.”

(*SIGH*) Chekote. Second frigg’n paragraph and already – before addressing ANY of Palin’s actual points and proposals – Kerry is switching focus (switching topics, indeed) to “the crisis” of global climate change.

One more time… there IS NO CRISIS. Where there’s a REAL crisis is when energy supply and demand tighten to the extent where oil shoots back up to $4/gal. or more and heating oil prices double or triple and electricity bills double or triple… now THAT’S the crisis that Palin is trying to avert.

Continuing to actually quote Kerry –

“Yes, she manages to write about the climate change action in Congress without ever mentioning the reason we are doing this in the first place.”

Chekote. It’s up to the supporters of Cap & Trade to defend their bill. In her editorial Palin is quite clear about why she opposes Cap & Trade.

(BTW, are you a Cap & Trade bill supporter or one who opposes the bill as written and passed? I mean, if you’re a supporter… well… that seems to me yet another indication that you’re actually more of a liberal Democrat than a conservative or even moderate Republican. Of course this doesn’t make you a “bad person,” but it adds context to this general back and forth we’re having over Palin.)

Continuing with Kerry…

“It’s like complaining about the cost of repairing a roof without factoring in the leaks destroying your home.”

No. (*SMIRK*) No it’s not.

Seriously, Chekote… THIS is the sort of nonsense you’re pointing to as evidence of a serious mind vs. your view of Palin as some sort of brunette bimbo…??? REALLY…???

(*SHAKING MY HEAD IN AMUSED DISGUST*)

Kerry again –

“The global climate change crisis threatens our economy and our national security in profound ways.”

So he says. Palin’s position is basically that even if one is to grant that global warming exists and is a “problem” per se (a “problem” now as opposed to how earth’s climate has constantly been changing over billions of years), she believes that Cap & Trade not only fails the basic cost/benefit test, but will actually HURT America and Americans far more than it’ll “help” America, Americans, or indeed the world.

Talk about “not addressing issues…” Hell, Chekote, Kerry basically skips over the whole cost issue.

Here… let’s quote from PALIN’S op-ed –

“American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. ”

True. Undeniably true. Basic industrial economics 101.

“There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.”

Yep. (Do you actually DISAGREE with Palin here, Chekote…???)

“Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.”

Chekote. The above is called… er… a FACT.

“In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase. ”

1) Do you deny this? 2) Did Kerry note this in HIS op-ed? 3) Does the fact that Kerry DIDN’T note this destroy his credibility with you? 4) If not, then why do this specifics Palin doesn’t address destroy HER credibility in your mind? 5) Are double standards and lack of intellectual consistency traits you admire in yourself or others…???

(*GRIN*) Hey… don’t take that last personally; just busting your balls (or eggs if that’s the case).

“The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will “necessarily skyrocket.” So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.”

“The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will “necessarily skyrocket.” So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. ”

Do you deny this? Basic economics… do you deny that the less “disposable” income you have the more rising energy prices will adversely impact you?

“Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, “poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity.” ”

Hmm… how’bout it, Chekote… I don’t recall Kerry quoting the “Oracle of Omaha.” Nor did I notice you bashing Kerry for not noting Buffett’s well-publicized comment. Why is that, Chekote… why is it that you seem so comfortable demanding of Palin what you apparently don’t of Kerry?

Hey… I’m getting bored. Nice “sword,” Chekote, but figuratively speaking… it’s clear who’s got the pistol. (*WINK*)

Chekote. I’m treating your posts seriously. I’m going to the trouble of actually addressing – specifically – your claims, “logic,” and analysis. I’m sorry… they just don’t stand up to rigorous challenge.

I mean… I was giving you the benefit of the doubt when you were simply blathering on about Palin’s supposed gaffs (and yes, real gaffs… I’ve constantly acknowledged Palin’s dismal Katie Couric interview performance) based upon off the cuff critiques. But now… now when you fall back on nonsense – when you point to Kerry’s op-ed – it’s crystal clear that you’re viewing this as a “sporting” challenge, that Palin’s not on your “team” so therefore no matter what she says or does you’re going to instinctively “boo” her and if necessary (sticking to the sports analogy) root for “other teams” even if they’re not YOUR team as long as by the “other team” winning, Palin loses and slips in the “standings.”

(*SIGH*)

Pretty much what I figured… what I feared… still… it doesn’t make your actions any less depressing to me.

BILL

They just don’t get it. The don’t understand that the GOP set itself up to a higher standard with all their talk of family values.

Exactly my point. Instead of reciting the oil reserves, Palin needed to attack the premise behind the legislation. That is, if she wants to be effective in her attack. What Palin did is the equivalent of talking about healthcare reform and not mentioning rising costs. Anyway, there is no point in even responding anymore.

No Otto, they probably stated something to the effect that living by a certain set of moral codes, ie family values, is actually benefical to the country, and families and society as a whole. To publicly state a virtue to be good for individuals and failing to meet your own goals , having to admit your mistake actually makes you human. To change you stated virture to justify your mistake makes you the hypocrite, a word you are fond of.
To never actually state what you think is right, or moral, or what virtues you live by, like some of your Dem hero, well that just makes you a coward.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=awS1xfKpVRs8&refer=home

Rather than hurt profits at power producers, the program became a justification for higher electricity prices, as the cost of carbon pollution got passed on to consumers.

In Germany, Europe’s largest economy, average wholesale electricity prices for delivery the next day surged 61 percent last year. The U.K.’s gain was 66 percent. Both jumps were larger than the 46 percent increase in Brent crude oil.

Taking into account the fact that:
global temps have been stable since 2001, isn’t a story the media places on the front page,
Europe is unable to meet the Kyoto standards,
Increasing cost to everyone, even those not making more that 250K
Cap & Trade carbon emission standards worse than Kyoto.
Wind, Solar complete inadaquate to meet a fraction of current demand or even yearly demand increases.

So Chek the arguement is why would the Dems push legislation that won’t work, hasn’t worked in Europe under Kyoto, will have no affect on temperatures, which aren’t rising anyway. So you don’t have to mention global warming to critique cap and trade. Even though healthcare reform and cap & trade legislation are completely similar. Neither will reduce cost, neither will fix the problem, and both begin from the false premise that increased government involvment will solve the problem.

I was critiquing Palin’s op-ed. You cannot attack cap and trade legislation and not mention globlal warming the very reason Dems are pushing this legislation. It is like talking about healthcare reform and not mentioning increasing costs. Here is the response from Kerry:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/15/what_gov_palin_forgot_97464.html

Look, Palin has proven herself to be a disaster for Republicans. She has had eight months to improve her policy knowledge and has refused to do so. Today’s op-ed piece was nothing more than a recycle of previous pieces she has written. Please stop wasting your time with Palin. She is not worth it. Just because people like Otto don’t like her, it doesn’t mean that she is worthwhile. Wake up, Bill!

Chekote. (*EXHALE*) You DO realize that either one of us could examine ANY op-ed, news report, or blog post and spend all day talking about what WASN’T addressed in the op-ed, news report, or blog post… right?

Hey… maybe I’ve got you wrong, but I’m being as honest as I can be when I tell you that you’re coming across as Otto lite.

As I wrote previously, if you can’t be moved by fact or reason, fine; but at least admit that this is the reality.

As for how cap and trade would effect the environment… (*SIGH*)… it wouldn’t. (Well… perhaps adversely as it would lead to manufacturing now still done in a highly regulated America moving overseas to China, India, Brazil and elsewhere.)

To cross thread a bit (connecting this post to comments made on “The Reckoning” thread) what cap and trade will do is punish “vulnerable” industries and thus regular Americans from farmers to factory workers to those involved in energy generation, while rewarding “traders,” white collar insiders who make their money off commissions on trades – trades that don’t actually produce anything of value.

Let’s say Cap & Trade is passed by the Senate in basically the same form as it was passed by the House and it goes into effect. How much do you wanna bet that before too long the financial gains of trading, of commissioned trading, will often include gains made by the spouses, children, and other relatives of powerful politicians?

See… this is a major problem with growing Washington power over the economy. The more power exercised by government, the more abuse of the system you get from the politicians themselves.

Don’t believe me? It exists already! How many lobbyists are family of powerful politicians? How many “small business contractors” turn out to be the son or daughter of a politician whose “company” somehow always seems to get the contract to do work for either a business in thrall to the politician or else you get stuff like “the kid” gets the dad’s (or mom’s) campaign website management contract at multi-thousands of dollars a month retainer?

I don’t care if you consider yourself a Republican or a Democrat, a liberal or a conservative, Chekote; what I don’t get about folks like you is how you can stomach the corruption and harm to the general economy and your fellow Americans that stunts like Cap & Trade will lead to.

I mean, Otto… him I understand; his kind I understand only too well. You, though… you don’t strike me as the kind of person who roots for one side or against one side consistently based upon ideological ties and double standards.

Anyway… (*SHRUG*)

BILL

My point is that the impetus behind cap and trade is concern over the environment. Palin totally ignored this in her op-ed.

(*CHUCKLE*)

Hey… (*SHRUG*)… there are worse maladies to suffer from; for example, you you’re a partisan hack with flexible principles depending upon whose ox is being gored.

Nope. I’ll stick with narcissism. (*WINK*)

Re: Chekote // Jul 14, 2009 at 7:05 pm –

Wow. Given a chance to actually make your case based upon an actual example we can all turn to debate… you come up with a general paragraph not citing one single specific sentence of Palin’s op-ed.

“The primary reason we import oil is because it is cheaper to buy it from abroad than to produce it domestically.”

Not necessarily. It depends upon what word prices are. To the best of my knowledge it still only costs the Saudis under $10 to produce a barrel of oil. Depending upon the source of oil, the type of oil, the geographic placement of the oil, etc., actual production costs fluctuate.

I frankly don’t know what the per barrel production costs of “American” crude is – the average or median cost. Do you? If it’s below $70 dollars/barrel it makes sense for us to develop our oil resources. At $50/barrel or less it DEFINITELY makes sense.

“Global warming.”

(*ROLLING MY EYES*)

Chekote. We’ve been over this ad nauseum.

“Climate change.”

Or… as God and I like to put it… CLIMATES CHANGE. (Yes… they do! I swear!)

(*SIGH*)

In any case, you’ve convinced me; nothing is going to change your mind. I won’t try to talk sense to you.

BILL