Yeah I'm ready to be behind one Democratic Candidate and for everyone to focus on taking back the whitehouse.


though if McCain won I really hope all the Bush Supporting Talk is really just pandering to the conservative base.

I think some of it definitely is. But I believe that he is at least as hawkish (read: stubborn) on Iraq as Bush was, and I have zero confidence that he knows jack shot about economics or health care or... really anything else that matters to me.

The hard question I have is what CAN be done about the economy. I mean I've criticized that Bernanke guy enough for his cutting interest rates and making things worse with inflation. But exactly what could the government do to help things?

I honestly believe that if we get out of Iraq Opec might have a change of heart about raising output... I mean isn't it possible that they are in part keep production at these levels to show disaproval of our presence in the middle east?

Or I could be way off but to me it seems like that could be once factor.

I think alternative energy is a major key to making us extremely prosperous again but then... if Alternative energy and getting off oil was so easy we'd already be further along than we are.

Nuclear energy would help us out a ton, but the same people pushing for us to seek out alternative fuel sources are irrationally scared of it.

Oil prices are really oil *futures*, which is important to keep in mind. The prices go up when there's perceived instability in the Middle East. So definitely, chaos in the region affects prices. And there's also the fact of China and India, which are now really starting to increase their demand for oil. I also think that the president can institute sound fiscal policies and not piss money away in fruitless / pointless ventures... so while there isn't a magic button, I do think that it is possible for things to begin to turn around if we don't have a complete bonehead in the Oval Office.

P.S. I don't think concern over nuclear waste is an irrational fear.

No, When people talk about nuclear being clean, I can't help but think "yeah except for the waste... we can't exactly shoot it into the sun yet."

It would be awesome if we could, though.

BTW, George McGovern (previously a Clinton supporter) has asked her to drop out...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/050...s.html#comments

Opec increasing production wouldn't do jack. The United States does not have the refining capacity to handle the demand, regardless of OPEC's output. There has not been a new refinery built in the United States for over 30 years, and with the different blends and environmental requirements mandated by different state and local laws, its almost impossible for a refinery half-way across the country to step up and help out with the demand in another area.

The only way we're going to see any relief over current gas prices is 1) increase our refining capacity and 2) reduce our dependency on foreign sources of oil (by drilling for our own. Florida and ANWR!

RE: Nuclear safety. There are a little over 100 commercial nuclear power generating units in the United States. To date, there have been only a handful of accident-related deaths. Compare that to the number of deaths in the coal-mining industry every year.

I don't think concern for nuclear safety is an irrational fear, either. But I do think its kind of like being scared to fly on an airplane while at the same time thinking nothing of hopping in your car and barreling down the interstate at 80mph with 6,000 other idiots.



And what, exactly, is there in Obama's record that indicates to you that HE does? I'm just askin'...

Right off the top of my head, his opposition to the gas tax holiday that virtually every economist ever says is a bad idea.

When I said "irrational fear" I was speaking about concerns of plants blowing up and stuffs.

Nuclear waste is a certainly a valid concern, but it's manageable. Certainly the nuclear waste we're creating now is doing less harm to the environment than our fossil fuel wastes are. And if the enthusiasm that's put towards energies like sun and wind were put towards the nuclear waste issue, we might have a way to launch it into the sun or recycle it for medical x-rays or something by now.



But back on topic, She "lost this thing in February."

Interesting comment.

But



WTF ARE YOU SMOKING THEY WERE UNCONTESTED PRIMARIES RAARRRRRRR

On the subject of the gas tax Hillary said, “I’m not going to put in my lot with economists,” which makes me terrified that on the subjects of healthcare and the war, she's not going to put her lot in with doctors and generals.

I don't know so much about the "holiday" being retarded. Any time we can reduce the tax burden on people, I'm all for it. I do know that it would only end up saving me about $2.00 every time I fill up, which works out roughly to about 6 bucks a month. woo hoo... That's just political pandering. And to the lowest common denominator at that.

I think Hilary shrieking about taking the profits from those evil oil companies and letting THEM pay the federal tax on the gas we buy was just about the most retarded idea ever.

NOTE TO HILARY: If you remove the 18 cent federal tax on gasoline, and force oil companies to make up the difference, the oil companies are going to pass that cost on to the consumer!

Let me just say that Hillary's health care plan PALES in significance to her health care record JMO KTHX FYI


Which is exactly the point. We take money away from the federal highway infrastructure budget and put it in the pockets of the oil companies. That makes no sense on any level at all, especially if you're supposed to be looking out for the ordinary guy. Anyone who thinks that lifting the gas tax would do anything positive for the country (except if you work for Shell) is smoking crack.

FYI, taxes ALWAYS end up coming out of yours and my pocket, not out of the company's. Therefore, taxes they don't go have to pay isn't money back in their pocket. It's back in mine. Which makes me happy.

Not that I think forgiving a measly 18 cent tax for a couple of months would do jack to help us out one bit, especially if after that given time period, everything is back to the status quo.

because that's what taxes are?

I just said that because you said
"We take money away from the federal highway infrastructure budget and put it in the pockets of the oil companies. That makes no sense on any level at all, especially if you're supposed to be looking out for the ordinary guy."

Yes, removing the tax (stupidly) takes money away from our highway budget, but that money ain't going back in the oil company's pockets. It goes back to (or is saved by) the consumer.

But like you said, it won't help nuthin'. It would be kind of like having your leg accidentally cut off and spraying Dermaplast on it not only to stop the bleeding, but thinking it may just help your leg magically grow back.

Sorry, I left out the part where the oil companies would raise prices to compensate...

We should really think more about getting off oil than increasing the infrastructure built around it. Lets face it, we could do better than petroleum if we really wanted to.

reducing dependence on oil = less plastics

Could we? Example, please. I mean, its nice to say and all, but its obvious that ethanol ain't the answer, at least as we currently use it. What else can we realistically do?


You're giving me heart palpitations. stop it.

Doesn't it mean more oil for plastics if we're using less elsewhere?

I could live with that.

I..... don't know, since I don't know how much gets used for plastics vs. gasoline.

1 barrel of crude oil (42 gallons) is broken down thusly:

Finished Motor Gasoline 51.4%
Distillate Fuel Oil 15.3%
Jet Fuel 12.3%
Still Gas 5.4%
Marketable Coke 5.0%
Residual Fuel Oil 3.3%
Liquefied Refinery Gas 2.8%
Asphalt and Road Oil 1.7%
Other Refined Products 1.5%
Lubricants 0.9%

So, by my calculations, if we all switch to nuclear plants and electric cars, Transformers become one million times cheaper...yep, that sounds right.

<_<

>_>

Less plastics = more die-cast?

So, does that mean that all TFs would be die-cast?

hmmm.
*Considers implication of TFs returning to their die-cast "glory" days.*

*blows brains out.*

There have been several developments in the Ethanol field, namely because of algae.

Yes, algae. You see, it's been discovered that algae can produce more Ethanol than corn. Right now, experiments are being carried out to find out what exactly is the best overall food to feed the algae and the best overall species of algae.

I think that Biodiesel would be the overall best short-term solution because of that if it wasn't for the fact that you can't just stick it in any gas tank.

*looks at 6" T!Ts*


*Shakes head sadly and scoops Stormtrooper's brain into a dustbin*

No vehicular solution is going to fix things, new cars and car overhauls are expensive and there are too many vehicles on the road - we've got to focus on substituting other uses of fossil fuels first if we're going to solve any problems.

IMO.

That's what I said, I just made a typo or seven.

so anyway, primaries...

I guess when this is all over, we can start a new thread on general election stuff to get the real starting

Oh, that's where I'll shine...get ready to get beat on people who aren't supporting Obama.

*prepares self for "beat down"*

I'm a Hillary Supporter but even I sorta wish she'd call it quits at this point. its gets more and more unlikely for her every day.

It seems that her basic argument now is that we don't know what scandal may pop up to sink Obama, so you should all agree that trumps pledged delegates, states won and the popular vote (which is BS BTW).

It is interesting to me how Obama's message is all about "what unites us is greater than what divides us" in light of exchanges like this:



The difference couldn't be more apparent.

and yet.. if she called it quits now, people would use it as an excuse to call her a quitter, whether now or later.
They're politicians. They never call it quits until you decide you don't want them to. Why is she expected to be any different?

But those people would be idiots. Idiots will always say idiotic things. It can't be stopped, so it's useless to worry about it.


I respectfully disagree. Edwards managed a pretty classy exit. He knew he couldn't win, so he stepped aside, citing the good of the party, and no one's calling him out for it.

You win a lot of goodwill by demonstrating a sense of perspective. Hillary either doesn't realize this, or completely lacks perspective.

Not just Edwards... everybody but Ron Paul did it as well. None of those candidates have been called "quitters," just realists. I don't see any basis in reality to justify thinking that people would call Clinton a quitter for dropping out when she has no path to the nomination. That's just contrarian thinking.

"Ron Paul."

So...Bob Barr is running for the Libertarian nomination.

Hillary Clinton's Letter to Obama re: Michigan and Florida.

WAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!

"Hay Obama why don't you support Michigan and Florida?"

Yeah why did the Clinton campaign reject Michigan's latest attempt to resolve the issue? Because it didn't favor her.

Not that any of this matters anyway -- even counting both states, she can't overtake Obama's lead. whah whah whahhhhh

If they DNC gives in to either state, they are total pusses, IMO.

But if she were to, say, magically get both states' delegates, couldn't the Super-Delegates work some magic and put her in the lead? Or is it just too far gone to even matter?