You people hate Obama

[TheMindWillNotLetGo]

We're not the only large oil consumer on the planet.  India and China are rapidly expanding their economies and both are grabbing fuel supplies to do so.  It's a global market and we're all competing in it.

I understand this.  I'm just not sure that the RNC does.

[Hoss]

I understand this.  I'm just not sure that the RNC does.

I equate this to the Republicans holding their fingers in their ears and yelling 'nananananana' so as not to hear it.  Not all of them do this of course, but they appear to do so.  And most everyone knows what they say about appearances.

[TheMindWillNotLetGo]

I equate this to the Republicans holding their fingers in their ears and yelling 'nananananana' so as not to hear it.  Not all of them do this of course, but they appear to do so.  And most everyone knows what they say about appearances.

hey, don't get me wrong, if I was going to keep posting in N&IP, I would have gone on a whole thing about how the republcian strategy since before GWB is all based around negativity and destruction, and really, reactionary, at the core.

But I'll just say this.

Before te primaries, their strategy was "AnybodyButObama"

Then the runners came, and then it became "AnybodyButRomney" (anyone remember that?)

which yielded them Cain, Perry, and Bachman

Then Gingrich came along...Everything the RNC has stood for since Clinton....

Now Romney's the man.

What a bucking joke.

[nathanm]

Instead we've got a cultural war holding the progress of a nation back.

This is precisely it. The dysfunction and the culture wars are just a way of distracting us while our country is looted and left for dead. There's plenty of blame to go around here, no need to limit it to a particular political party. One could argue that some particular organizations are more culpable than others, but that misses the point that most of big (anything) and both political parties are participating.

Graft is everywhere. In healthcare we got Medicare Part D or ACA from Congress. In banking we got TARP out of Congress and most recently the backdoor bailout that was the mortgage settlement, gifted to us by the DoJ. Defense contractors sell us planes that cost half a billion each. Most every new TSA initiative involves some enormous no bid contract. Congresspeople go to Washington and find their nice new friends the lobbyists schmoozing it up and providing them with talking points, research, dinners, and junkets. And so they let the graft flow, often without even realizing it, since many of the bills that get submitted are mostly written by the lobbyists! And through this nifty deception, they get radicalized further and further.

I don't even blame most Congresspeople, individually. You have to remember the revolving door. The lobbyists are old hands, often respected in legislative circles, and obviously still have a lot of friends. If Joe, who you've always been in fairly strong agreement with on most issues, starts talking about how he doesn't like a particular bill (that he's getting paid to torpedo), you'll naturally be inclined to be more favorable to his view than you would be if you came to the issue without prejudice.

The saddest part is that choking out the federal government won't even help. The vast majority of statehouses are at least as corrupt, you just hear about it less often because there are fewer people watching. At least at the federal level we have laws that force most of it out into the open. That isn't true in many states.

tl;dr: The system is broken and nobody seems inclined to even acknowledge which end the smoke is coming from, much less do anything to fix it!

[Gaspar]

I'm glad the president came here.  He gave a very nice speech.  I am confident that when he approves the remaining northern leg of the Keystone in the next month or two it will make the republicans look very foolish, and make him look very cautious and methodical in his decision making process.  This will provide just enough time for oil prices to react before november and salvage any damage to his campaign.

I thought he received a very nice welcome here.  As with any candidate traveling into an area of opposing political philosophy, there were detractors and some protest, but no outright embarrassment.  

We learned some new things in his speeches yesterday, namely that the failure of green energy projects like Solyndra were more the fault of the 2005 Bush Congress and the Chinese.  I think that will help to clear his record, and put some people at ease who may have viewed that as a failure linked to the stimulus.  We also learned that he is "all in" for an all of the above energy policy.  For folks in Oklahoma this is very important because we are both supply and midstream focused, and we also have lots of wind and sunshine to sell.  

I was however a little upset that Air Force One did not purchase fuel here before heading to Ohio.  Our Jet A is among the cheapest in the country, and it would have made a great photo-op to show the president swiping his AMEX for 64,000 gal of Jet fuel.

All and all, it was a good visit.

[erfalf]

This is precisely it. The dysfunction and the culture wars are just a way of distracting us while our country is looted and left for dead. There's plenty of blame to go around here, no need to limit it to a particular political party. One could argue that some particular organizations are more culpable than others, but that misses the point that most of big (anything) and both political parties are participating.

Graft is everywhere. In healthcare we got Medicare Part D or ACA from Congress. In banking we got TARP out of Congress and most recently the backdoor bailout that was the mortgage settlement, gifted to us by the DoJ. Defense contractors sell us planes that cost half a billion each. Most every new TSA initiative involves some enormous no bid contract. Congresspeople go to Washington and find their nice new friends the lobbyists schmoozing it up and providing them with talking points, research, dinners, and junkets. And so they let the graft flow, often without even realizing it, since many of the bills that get submitted are mostly written by the lobbyists! And through this nifty deception, they get radicalized further and further.

I don't even blame most Congresspeople, individually. You have to remember the revolving door. The lobbyists are old hands, often respected in legislative circles, and obviously still have a lot of friends. If Joe, who you've always been in fairly strong agreement with on most issues, starts talking about how he doesn't like a particular bill (that he's getting paid to torpedo), you'll naturally be inclined to be more favorable to his view than you would be if you came to the issue without prejudice.

The saddest part is that choking out the federal government won't even help. The vast majority of statehouses are at least as corrupt, you just hear about it less often because there are fewer people watching. At least at the federal level we have laws that force most of it out into the open. That isn't true in many states.

tl;dr: The system is broken and nobody seems inclined to even acknowledge which end the smoke is coming from, much less do anything to fix it!

Nathan & I agree. They are all equally culpable. They all play politics equally dirty. Seems to me that the reason politicians become politicians is to stay politicians, not to legislate. How do they have all this time to go on the networks and sling mud, especially considering the travel/vacation/actual work they are doing/should be doing?

Demand simple legislation with no unrelated amendments/riders. All legislation should be able to stand on its own merit.
Demand term limits. We limit the president, why not congress & unelected bureaucrats. Demand campaign finance reform.
Demand campaign finance reform. Personally I think their should be federal funds appropriated to federal elections, distributed equally among two or three candidates. It seems rash, but I think it would lessen the pressures of fundraising. Politicians are beholden to their cash cows. Not right. On that front, I also think congress should reside for most of the year in their home states. This would make lobbying more difficult if the lobbyees were spread out all over the country.

Ok, enough for now.

Interesting observations, many people I know have been sitting out the Republican primary. But they have every intention of showing up in November to vote for, quote, "anyone but Obama". These are people that are level headed (they don't think he's from Kenya, they don't care that he's black) and probably only get their news from the networks for the most part (who tend to be somewhat favorable to the President). They don't hate the man, they hate what they perceive he is doing to the county. Whether it's justified or not, Obama happens to be presiding during a time of extreme economic hardship. It is what it is, and people are laying the blame primarily on Obama. IMO, hearing Obama whine about his situation only seems to make it worse.

[AquaMan]

To fully appreciate Gaspar's post simply place in front of mirror for correctly reversed meaning. Then disregard in usual manner.

Nathan I am surprised at your cynical post. For the most part, we seldom elect really bright people to public office. We elect people with connections, social prowess, money or access to money for support, street fighting ability, are visually within the norm and possessing at least some measure of communications ability. They start at local levels where they can bully school boards, authorities etc. by using those characteristics and work up through state government populated with other mediocre minds. State governments are appalling in their lack of foresight and have always been so. Some are truly committed, intelligent, competent managers but they are a small, easily overwhelmed, minority. Most states are like Oklahoma, dominated by rural interests with poorly educated but well known and respected families. They insist on simple solutions that are easily described and fit well on a sign or sticker. Drill baby Drill. The Alaska governor who failed to even finish her term is the iconic example of the process.

Why would you expect that once they get into truly powerful national legislative positions that they would suddenly have a grasp of complex issues surrounding the operation of a huge bureaucracy filled with career employees who have seen politicians come and go for decades? It seems most of them are busy trying to understand how to do their jobs during their first terms and occupied with being re-elected most of the time. Being fairly ambitious folks they are always on the lookout for a position after the voters turn on them. My point is that lobbyists fill in the knowledge gap for guys who got elected on their charm, wits and other peoples money. If they didn't have that input we would have even worse legislation based on incomplete knowledge.

The answers have always been that rather than carping about how stupid the legislator is, or how self serving the lobbyist is, or how greedy and graft dominated our process is, that we instead focus on making sure we elect representatives who are smarter than we are, know exactly who the lobbyists are paid by, who they are meeting with and what relation to fund raising they have. Transparency. Education. Ethics training. Then, prohibit employment with any lobbyist they dealt with, any organization they regulated and any company who funded them for at least 4 years after stepping down. Combine that with moderating the staggering benefits they receive and we can right the ship.

Afterall, a lobbyist is merely the communications focus of large organized groups of the electorate. They are not inherently criminal.

 

[Gaspar]

Nathan & I agree. They are all equally culpable. They all play politics equally dirty. Seems to me that the reason politicians become politicians is to stay politicians, not to legislate. How do they have all this time to go on the networks and sling mud, especially considering the travel/vacation/actual work they are doing/should be doing?

Demand simple legislation with no unrelated amendments/riders. All legislation should be able to stand on its own merit.
Demand term limits. We limit the president, why not congress & unelected bureaucrats. Demand campaign finance reform.
Demand campaign finance reform. Personally I think their should be federal funds appropriated to federal elections, distributed equally among two or three candidates. It seems rash, but I think it would lessen the pressures of fundraising. Politicians are beholden to their cash cows. Not right. On that front, I also think congress should reside for most of the year in their home states. This would make lobbying more difficult if the lobbyees were spread out all over the country.

Ok, enough for now.

Interesting observations, many people I know have been sitting out the Republican primary. But they have every intention of showing up in November to vote for, quote, "anyone but Obama". These are people that are level headed (they don't think he's from Kenya, they don't care that he's black) and probably only get their news from the networks for the most part (who tend to be somewhat favorable to the President). They don't hate the man, they hate what they perceive he is doing to the county. Whether it's justified or not, Obama happens to be presiding during a time of extreme economic hardship. It is what it is, and people are laying the blame primarily on Obama. IMO, hearing Obama whine about his situation only seems to make it worse.

+1
. . .And I'm still waiting for a signature on the STOCK Act!

No matter how you look at it, ACCOUNTABILITY is an issue for this president.  He is probably one of the best speech makers I have every heard, and yet he nether holds, or even accepts accountability for anything he poses. That which comes out of his mouth is opposed in practice and results.  

He is the most political president we have ever had, and the first that I can remember to spend his entire first term campaigning and convincing people that awkward programs would produce positive results (and they didn't).  Now his campaign for re-election hovers on proclamations that everything is everyone else's fault.

He's great at sales, but just not good Operations or CEO material.

[Conan71]

We're not the only large oil consumer on the planet.  India and China are rapidly expanding their economies and both are grabbing fuel supplies to do so.  It's a global market and we're all competing in it.

We need a game changing technology, one that puts American innovation in the forefront of industrial nations.  And we need it to be a government project, much like the Manhattan project.  If we leave it to the private market, either they'll stifle innovation to protect our current energy industry, or they'll make it proprietary so no one else can use it.

The government was doing as much as it could to incubate bio-diesel and ethanol during the Bush admin.  The tax credits were there, federal loans were there, business incubator programs were there.  I was giddy with the prospect of so many start ups because they all require some sort of efficient heat source to distill or help catalyze the process.  I even got in on some of those projects, selling equipment.  IMO, that program was grossly mis-managed and what we wound up with was a bunch of small entrepreneurships run on preference/incubator type programs (i.e. race, gender or ethnic minority preference) which had zero clue about running a business and no way to get rid of waste by-products.  I’m not implying that minorities are poor business people, the problems with programs like that is that they seldom take an honest look at the merit of each proposal and business plan along with establishing some sort of prediction of success rather than the XY chromosome arrangement or color of skin as the larger basis for approval.

To be perfectly honest, the government needs big business to be the partner.  Big business can raise the capital needed to cover every aspect and has the ability to staff up much more easily to handle collection, refining, transportation, and supply chain.  As far as there being some sort of new "Manhattan Project” development, it’s hard to fathom what could be next or vastly different, yet I’m sure our great grand children will think we lived in the stone ages back in 2012.

I have no idea why this president and the two Congresses he’s worked with so far have not pushed this in a different direction.  Something about priorities and a huge deficit may be the problem.  Of course, biodiesel and ethanol are not the be-all end-all to our energy concerns but they can take pressure off demand for oil.  The argument that we cannot produce enough virgin stock to feed the earth and create fuel is entirely bunk. In fact, with newer ethanol technology, you wind up with a better quality feedstock off the back end of the process.  We’ve got the technology and space to do it.  Biodiesel could very easily stand on its own right now with no direct per-gallon subsidy and be competitive with petroleum diesel.  The private sector is starting to ramp up technology on their own.  I’m personally aware of a large scale project ADM is working on as well as Tyson Foods.  It’s coming around again and high fuel prices will make it worth the risk to those best equipped to make alternative fuels a better reality.

Michael, I was just as embarrassed to see people along the motorcade route giving President Obama the thumbs down as I was to see people flipping off Cheney’s motorcade when he came downtown a few years back.  I only have two nitpicks about what you wrote:

A) It’s not like there isn’t precedence for this sort of disrespect.  Please don’t try and con the rest of us into believing that the liberal hatred of President Bush was any different nor was it expressed respectfully.  “Shrub” or “Baby Bush” ringing a bell?  Go to Tim Gilpin’s FB page if you want to see daily reminders of Bush Obsession Syndrome.  

B) Just because President Bush may have exercised poor judgement in terms of debt and deficit, that’s an extremely poor excuse to continue the trend.  If you were CEO of a company and fired for continued piss-poor management and huge losses, how long would your successor expect to last in that job if they continued to manage the company as you had done and used you as an excuse for why they are still leading the company off a cliff?

Finally, it’s not uncommon at all for the governor of an opposing party to not meet with a sitting president when they come to their state or even for a governor of the same party to not meet with an unpopular president.  The governor is NOT the employee of the president, but rather the people of their state.

As far as politicians flapping their gums on what the pipeline is and isn't is basically a bunch of morons trying to take credit for other’s hard work.  It’s as much a stretch for President Obama to claim credit for approving the southern leg of the Keystone as it would be for Governors Fallin or Perry to lay claim to it.  

My understanding is there’s really not much red tape at all on the southern portion of the pipeline and it’s much simpler since the State Department doesn’t have to be involved in the process.  IOW, this would have happened with or without a visit to Cushing.  Personally, I don’t blame the president for making a campaign trip out here.  He needs the PR right now.  I admire him for not entirely forsaking Oklahoma in spite of the obvious lack of support for him here.

I’m tired of the constant arch partisan rhetoric.  I’m quite certain it wasn’t like this 30 to 40 years ago.  With the need to fill so much content time on radio and television, politics has become a blood sport in America.

[erfalf]

Afterall, a lobbyist is merely the communications focus of large organized groups of the electorate. They are not inherently criminal.

I agree that lobbyists are not inherently bad or even that they espouse bad ideas. Agreed. Naturally, I believe that most of the government should be at the state level, with a far more limited federal government. Therefore, lobbying efforts that truly benefited each state would not be harmed by sending the legislature back home. Besides, it's not like we have the technology capabilities of the 19th century. Being in close proximity, like in D.C., is not a necessity anymore.

It's is the financing of the politicians that is far more troublesome. Money (financiers) speaks louder than words (lobbyists).

[AquaMan]

+1
. . .And I'm still waiting for a signature on the STOCK Act!

No matter how you look at it, ACCOUNTABILITY is an issue for this president.  He is probably one of the best speech makers I have every heard, and yet he nether holds, or even accepts accountability for anything he poses. That which comes out of his mouth is opposed in practice and results.  

He is the most political president we have ever had, and the first that I can remember to spend his entire first term campaigning and convincing people that awkward programs would produce positive results (and they didn't).  Now his campaign for re-election hovers on proclamations that everything is everyone else's fault.

He's great at sales, but just not good Operations or CEO material.

Funny you bring up stuff like that. Yesterday while searching for data on how many presidents have publicly visited OK (couldn't find anything in the last two decades), I came upon a published masters thesis about the subject of presidents campaigning during office. It turns out that since the late seventies presidents have grown to become full term campaigners aided by jets, computers, the internet and constant demands by their constituents. Every president now spends his entire term in what can be construed as campaigning.

This highlights your lack of perspective on politics. You say he's the most political president we've ever had, yet unless I've missed something in your posts I don't think you have a poli-sci degree or have done much political history research. Just in my lifetime Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Clinton, and BushII were all equal to or greater than Obama in political leaning. Lyndon was the master, Roosevelt was pretty good too. When it suits you I'm sure we'll hear how incompetent he is in the political mastery of legislative politics. That shows your anti Obama streak with a spotlight.

You wouldn't recognize good CEO or operations material if it was right in front of you and it is. We have 24 months of recovery, we dodged a deep depression through his leadership, our particular state benefits from his energy policy more than most yet refuses to acknowledge it because of resolute political lunacy like yours.

I know how disappointing it is for your ilk to have to run a prevaricator like Romney against a president who has lead us through a financial nightmare with humor, dignity and respect. A president who is benefiting from a recovering economy and still will visit states hostile to him like AZ and OK. It limits your choices. You can pray for economic downturn or insure one by electing Romney.

[erfalf]

I know how disappointing it is for your ilk to have to run a prevaricator like Romney against a president who has lead us through a financial nightmare with humor, dignity and respect. A president who is benefiting from a recovering economy and still will visit states hostile to him like AZ and OK. It limits your choices. You can pray for economic downturn or insure one by electing Romney.

This shows your anti-republican steak with a spotlight. What makes you believe Romney would be that detrimental to the economy?

While I'm not a fan by any means, I'm not ready to go out and say he would be a disaster either.

[AquaMan]

I agree that lobbyists are not inherently bad or even that they espouse bad ideas. Agreed. Naturally, I believe that most of the government should be at the state level, with a far more limited federal government. Therefore, lobbying efforts that truly benefited each state would not be harmed by sending the legislature back home. Besides, it's not like we have the technology capabilities of the 19th century. Being in close proximity, like in D.C., is not a necessity anymore.

It's is the financing of the politicians that is far more troublesome. Money (financiers) speaks louder than words (lobbyists).

There is no synergy in states being strengthened to the point where legislators work from home. And at worst you will find states start to regionalize and create alliances that are at odds with other regional alliances and soon separationist talk emerges. I have never been impressed with the mentality of states that are usually dominated by rural vs metro battles. If either side dominates the state loses. There is immense value in states representatives meeting face to face on a regular basis to transact the nations business. How often have you seen misunderstandings on forums or e-mail totally destroy communication?

I think everyone is dismayed at the power of money to corrupt our election process. Financiers of campaigns like Newt's (his comes to mind) scare the bejeezus out of us all. Free speech is a biotch.

[we vs us]

This shows your anti-republican steak with a spotlight. What makes you believe Romney would be that detrimental to the economy?

While I'm not a fan by any means, I'm not ready to go out and say he would be a disaster either.

He's attached to a party that's gone completely and entirely 'round the bend.  

[AquaMan]

This shows your anti-republican steak with a spotlight. What makes you believe Romney would be that detrimental to the economy?

While I'm not a fan by any means, I'm not ready to go out and say he would be a disaster either.

Surprised that I am an Obama supporter? But I am not an anti-republican or even anti-conservative. A huge difference between guys like Gas and myself. I look for what an elected official says and does before I consider their political persuasion. I am in the great American middle that finds something to like about Bush and something to admire about Obama but can't find much to like about an Inhofe or a Gingrich. I like some things about Christie, Jeb Bush and others who are republican but seem to think for themselves and act for their constituents. My republican friends are frustrated at the ineptness in finding a candidate that will represent them.

Romney has such a weak relationship with public service and the truth. He left politics after one term as governor for private service yet continued to run for president for the last 8 years or so (the Palin strategy). He never holds a political position any longer than it takes to get him what he needs at the moment. The etch a sketch remark by his top campaign manager was a matter of fact reflection of what they all know. And, he is an inveterate liar. His own party knows it and unfortunately could not find anyone with as much money who could overcome his momentum.

There is absolutely no indication that he has the integrity, the knowledge of foreign affairs or the political skills necessary to be anything but a pretty good CEO of a corporation. This country isn't a corporation.