Meeting Dick Morris

I had the pleasure recently of meeting uber-strategist Dick Morris in Santa Barbara at the weekend retreat put on by David Horowitz.

I have been critical of Morris in the past because while he a brilliant strategist, he is not a visionary. However, to his credit, he has never claimed to be one. His focus is on helping his clients get elected. It is not about policy or governing.

I met him the first evening of the retreat, and the next day he spoke at lunch. While he has agreed to do an interview with me, his remarks at the lunch contained so much red meat that political junkies everywhere should be temporarily satiated.

In 1980, Bill Clinton was fired from being Governor of Arkansas. He turned to Dick Morris, who normally consults for republicans, most notably Senator Trent Lott. Dick Morris told Clinton to apologize to voters, and keep his wife Hillary hidden. Clinton came back in 1982 and won his old job back.

In 1994, Bill Clinton lost both houses of Congress. He turned to Dick Morris, who again told him to apologize to voters and keep his wife hidden. He won reelection.

Morris has said on many occasions that he likes Bill, but not Hillary. He also reminded people when he was working for Bill that he was not ever working for Hillary.

With that, I present the remarks of Dick Morris.

“This is my fourth year being here. Whenever I am invited back somewhere, it is a reminder that people remember what I previously said. I said Hillary was inevitable. Now I think Obama will win.”

“Obama read the rulebook. He understood that money dries up. Other financial sources are needed. Obama went after internet dollars, and did not rely only on large donors. Also, when someone buys an Obama t-shirt or button, he gets your email address. Direct mail doesn’t work as well. You spend money. The internet is free. This is the Howard Dean model, and these people being reached are the true believers.”

“For others, the fear of losing is greater than the fear of selling out. After Super Tuesday, Obama simply went back to the internet and asked for money. It was only a click away. Al Gore got the internet, but Bill and Hillary can’t type. Obama knew he would lose Super Tuesday, but he had more access to more money.”

“Obama was in it for the long haul. He understood and prepared for the caucuses. He lost New Jersey by about a 60-40% margin, but then he would win Idaho by a 12:1 margin. This allowed him to collect delegates, and it is all about delegates. Obama organized in the post Super Tuesday states, and Hillary never recovered.”

“Hillary ran as the candidate of experience. She had none. When Bill was President, the White House Pastry Chef had 8 years of experience. Democrats are revolutionary. and Hillary ceded the change argument to Obama.”

“Hillary loves negative campaigning, and so do her people. She wanted to make Obama an ingenue, so she had to be experienced.”

“Hillary has lost. That is an applause line. Nothing can save her.”

“Prolonged campaigns are good for ratings. I like that.”

“If Obama does not die, then Hillary might be willing to settle for Vice President. I wouldn’t sell this guy life insurance if he does agree to make her VP. If he does, he gets saddled with all of the Clinton scandals. Also, you don’t want a VP who hates you and you hate.”

“Hillary stays in the race to get in one last punch so she can hurt Obama and elect McCain. Here 2012 campaign slogan is ‘Itold you so.'”

“Hillary is disloyal if she says something negative about Obama after she drops out. However, anything she says the day before she drops out is merely campaigning. That is why she stays in. She cannot attack him after she drops out.”

“Now, for my next rash prediction. Without political parties, McCain wins. He has the versimilitude to handle tough questions on ‘Meet the Press.’ He was tortured in Hanoi. He is also the spokesman for consensus in America.”

“With political parties, McCain is in trouble. Republicans are dead in Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico. Republicans are dead in Alaska, where Ted Stevens should resign immediately. He is a disgrace. He should withdraw from the race immediately. New Hampshire is gone, with Sununu trailing former Governor Jean Shaheen by 15 points. Cornyn is tied in Texas. McConnell is tied in Kentucky. Coleman is shaky in Minnesota. Republicans are ahead in Mississippi, Oregon and Maine, but those could go bad. We could see a filibuster proof 62 democratic Senators and a pickup of 25-30 democratic House seats.”

“The irony is that the republicans are doomed to defeat, yet they have a great candidate for President in John McCain. The democrats are expecting major victories everywhere, but they have a weak candidate for President in Barack Obama. America likes McCain, but not republicans. The question is what matters more to voters, and what will triumph, the party or the candidate.”

“Obama has gone from being desperate to prove he is not a Muslim to desperate to prove he did not go to church.”

“McCain can win by entering the democratic primary. He has to be a democratic opponent to to Obama. He should be a populist, and win over Hillary voters. Cops, firefighters, and others in places like West Virginia hate Hillary, but their racism is greater than their sexism. It is close though.”

“McCain needs to talk about global warming, Enron and Arthur Anderson, and other issues that fire up democrats.”

“Even Hillary voters prefer McCain over Hillary.”

“We cannot make McCain move right. We have to let him go. He shuold make Joseph Lieberman his Vice President.”

(At this point I was ready to turn into the Incredible Hulk. I believe the emotion I felt was rage.)

“I cannot advise McCain and go on Fox News and get paid for both. However, I can write anything I want.”

(For those who find this to be the worst aspect of politics, at least Morris is honest about his motives.)

“McCain needs to hit Obama hard on the notion of withdrawing from Iraq. If you ask Obama what we do now, he is too smart. He will finesse the issue. McCain needs to ask him what he will do if we pull out, and the situation gets worse. We ask him about next year. Does Obama understand that if we pull out, pessimism would be everywhere and disaster would follow? McCain should then tell America, ‘Well then listen to me now! If you remember what happened in Cambodia, and you believe that if we reenter Iraq there will be five times as many casualties, then we should just stay!”

“We must get McCain elected. Obama will fleece us. My new book is called “Fleeced” for this reason. Under Obama, taxes will go up, Capital Gains taxes will be doubled, taxes on dividends will be doubled, and social security taxes will go up. We know this because he tells us this. Labor remains, but capital can go anywhere. People will stop investing in the United States. We will have a decade of 1% growth just like Japan went through.”

“As bad as that is, taxes can be undone. Health care cannot. Obama claims that there are 47 million uninsured. This includes 12 million illegal aliens. They can go home if they want health care. We need to go to Kentucky, West Virginia and Pennsylvania and focus on the Federal subsidizing of health insurance to illegals. ALso, 15 million without health care are on medicare or medicaid.

When you have the same supply, but increased demand, prices go up. This means rationing. So how will health care be rationed? It will be rationed by age, health, and likely life span. That means that a 78 year old war veteran with a bad heart will be rejected, while a 28 year old illegal alien needing basic care will be accepted. Those who get rejected and want second opinions will be told there are none, and to get lost. The old war veteran may try to offer to pay for the operation himself, but the system will not allow it. When government controls health care, they decide what is important. Doctors will be able to perform abortions, but not heart bypasses. Forget Social Security, we cannot even gut rent control in New York City.”

“Then there is terrorism. The media does not get terrorism. They have diversity guidelines. The Society of Professional Journalists has a handbook. Journalists cannot refer to anyone as an ‘Islamic terrorist’ or ‘Muslim extremist.’ Any mention of terrorism has to include the KKK and the Nazi Party. Alongside images of terrorism victims there must be pictures of Arab kids crying to show that we are all equally in this together.”

“The Patriot Act is lied about. An Arab was arrested in a library after he was monitored discussing a the London bombings. He was the head of the London plot. The words Brooklyn Bridge do not translate well into Arabic. Luckily we have warrantless wiretaps. New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly flooded the area with police officers. Boats underneath intercepted the communications. Yes, Khalid Sheik Mohammed might have gotten wet during his interrogation, but he confessed to the Brooklyn Bridge plot. Kelly was afraid to take credit for preventing this attack because that would have meant confessing to the existence of warrantless wiretaps. He did not answer “no,” when asked if we did anything special out of modesty. He did it so that he could continue to be effective. He was able to overhear conversations of the terrorists saying that the Brooklyn Bridge was ‘too hot.’ This led to the attack being called off. Obama strips us of President Bush’s preventative measures.”

“Anybody predicting 2008 is nuts. It is not going to be close, but it is far from over. Either way, it will not be close. I predict Obama. That may scare the living daylights out of you, but that is so that we will all be ready.”

(Mr. Morris then gave out his email address to the crowd.)

A questioner then asked how we can defeat the press, who will obviously take Obama’s side during the campaign. Mr. Morris responded.

“This goes beyond Dan Rather. it is about more than the Sorosites or Scott McLellan. People say there is too much political propaganda. ‘4 Score and 7 Years Ago’ was political propaganda. McLellan’s book said nothing. He was not being disloyal. He just allowed himself to be portrayed that way.

Real danger comes in the Fairness Doctrine, or as I call it, the Alan Colmes Full Employment Law. The issue will not be the on air radio personalities. The issue of fairness will force stations to have liberals in radio management. That will allow more liberal regulation of programming behind the scenes.”

I then asked my question. I waited long enough for my hostility over his recommendations for McCain to win the election to subside.

“Mr. Morris, I want John McCain to win as well, but what is the point of offering a triangulation strategy? If he is insincere in his intentions, how can he possibly govern effectively as a conservative upon getting elected? SHouldn’t he run as who he is?”

(I believe that one reason Bill Clinton could not govern was because he ran as a centrist and tried to ram through a liberal agenda. Ronald Reagan was able to enact a conservative agenda because he ran as a conservative. People may have disagreed with him, but they knew what to expect. The same was the case with George W. Bush. Liberals trying to revise history say he ran as a moderate, but that was never the case. John McCain is a conservative on many issues, and while I want to win elections, as a pragmatist, outright deceit crosses the line.)

Morris was unapologetic in his response.

“No! No, no, no! This is the worst year for republicans since 1974. It might be the worst year since 1964. We are looking at a complete wipeout. Obama can’t lose. We need to win.”

Tammy Bruce then springboarded off of my question by continuing it for me. I cannot print her remarks, but I was in complete concurrence with her. Dick Morris would not budge.

“We have to co-opt the left’s positions. We need a populist agenda, and more regulation of oil, in the same way we regulate stocks.”

Bob Zubrin, who is an expert on issues related to energy, asked Morris if it was politically feasible to forget about climate change, since he did not see it as being a major concern as the media does. On this issue, Morris was receptive.

“You may be right, I have to poll it.”

One thing I said to Morris in jest before his speech made me think deeply after hearing him.

“Dick, I love your columns on Hillary, but I need to ask you a favor. Can you stop working for democrats and stick to republicans? The last time you worked for a democrat, you beat our brains in. Stay on our side.”

His response was unsettling.

“I might work for a democrat again. I probably won’t. I don’t see it happening.”

The difference between me and Mr. Morris is that I am a true believer, and he seems to love the game.

I think his prescriptions are wrong and immoral for any self respecting republican. However, I also want to win. I hope McCain ignores his solutions on embracing the left and wins anyway. If I have to choose purity or winning, I still want a victory.

I also understand that it will be much tougher for him to govern as a conservative unless he runs as one.

Liberals may say that it would be better for America if he ran as a moderate, but they would never be saying this if Obama were to win. They would want a hard left government.

I did enjoy meeting Dick Morris, but the respectful sharp disagreements are there.

Morris wins elections. He is a very good strategist. It is the day after the election I care about.

eric

43 Responses to “Meeting Dick Morris”

  1. How exactly do you expect McCain to govern as a conservative if the House and Senate become as Democratic as most pundits are predicting? The best he can do it what Reagan and Clinton did – talk idealistic but act pragmatically. Clinton and Reagan had to give in order to take. For Reagan to wreck the regulation state and militarize the nation he had to give the Dems his John Hancock on piles of spending for their districts. For Clinton to get the tax tables he wanted he had to give the GOP piles of spending for their districts. McCain would have to govern as Clinton and Reagan did – from a point in the middle, from compromise. He will have no choice. To unrealistic ideologues, centrism and compromise are dirty words, but in real life these are vital to a successful society. Hopefully, McCain will get back to his roots and move back to the center-right where he had been for most of his political career.

    JMJ

  2. parrothead says:

    I do agree with Jersey that he will have to be pragmatic and accomplish what he can and it will be somewhere in the middle as did Reagan, Clinton and oh yes George W. Bush. Look at Bush’s no child left behind bill or medicare prescription drug expansion as an example. I hate the term moderate, almost as much as conservative or liberal, because in truth these labels are meaningless. Truth is that those positions are issue based. Just because I favor small government does it make me a conservative or because I am pro choice and do not oppose gay marriage am I a liberal or do all these positions make me a moderate. Most people do not fall neatly into either camp on all issues. George Bush certainly campaigned favoring big government solutions and delivered on them so he is not a conservative in that arena. He was much more isolaitonist on foreign policy prior to 9/11. I think McCain should and will campaign as himself on his positions and I think he can win that way.

  3. If the Dems do get that magic number in the Senate, however, McCain will become impotent unless he moves way over to the left.

    JMJ

  4. parrothead says:

    Even if they surpass 60 that will include a few that are not way left which will keep things somewhat in check plus it is still not a veto proof majority. McCain still likes to work across the aisle as Reagan did so I beleive he will find ways to get things done.

  5. Gayle says:

    Dick Morris likes Bill? Dick Morris has always confused me. I heard him relate a story on Hannity and Colmes not too long ago about Bill knocking Dick Morris to the floor in the kitchen of the Governor’s mansion and balling his fist up, pulling his arm back as if to cold-cock Morris but Hillary stopped Bill. Seems to me Morris is just a wee bit ungrateful!

    At any rate, I take Dick Morris with a grain of salt because I feel his hatred of Hillary gets in the way of his judgment. Although he did say Obama would win the Primary and so maybe I should take Morris a bit more seriously. Still, there’s something about Dick Morris that I can’t really put into words. At the risk of sounding like a moonbat, it’s more of a feeling than anything. Perhaps it’s just me.

  6. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. There is no industry as regulated as Big Oil. If other businesses were as regulated, we, as a country, would be out of business. We need to LIFT regulations because overburdening the oil industry has only brought us to the place we are today!

    Go to http://www.FedUpNetwork.com and check in on what’s happening with oil and what we, as citizens, can do to get the message out… we have had enough of high gas prices and environmentalists controlling our national energy policies!!!

  7. Gayle says:

    In addition, go to Obama’s website and then go to McCain’s. I heard on Fox News that Obama’s website was far better than McCain’s and that Obama understood the importance of the internet more thoroughly than McCain does. That’s probably true, but I don’t see any huge difference in their websites.

  8. Micky 2 says:

    Yea Gayle, I remember Morris telling that story of how him and Bill almost got into a scrap.
    A similar occurance took place once in a white house doorway also.

  9. Well, PH, he will have a problem with judicial and other nominations for confirmations. He won’t get anything by way of taxes or entitlements. He will probably have his way with the GWOT and Iraq. On trade I doubt there will be any change in the long-running status quo. However, if his cabinet drops the ball, there will be more scrutiny and hearing and heads on blocks. McCain will not have it as easy as Bush in simply ignoring the law, neglecting regulatory responsibilities and packing the agencies with interest-conflicted hacks. So, there will be a change one way or the other. He will not be able to “govern” all that conservatively.

    JMJ

  10. “WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. There is no industry as regulated as Big Oil.”

    That’s the biggest pile of nonsense I’ve ever read.

    “we have had enough of high gas prices and environmentalists controlling our national energy policies!!!”

    On what planet do you reside where “environmentalists” control “our national energy policies?”

    To anyone gullible enough to believe these complete and total lies, boy do I have a bridge for you, baby! LOL!!!

    JMJ

  11. Mr. Naron says:

    Checking in, Eric. Is there any way to turn off the awesome Survivor tune?

  12. Micky 2 says:

    Like I’ve said before jeresy, you were the first to buy that bridge.

    Is it a complete and total lie ? How is that so ? Can you back that up ?

    Drilling in Anwar is environmentally safer, economically cheaper, easier to do, politically safer, and is wanted by Alaska. So explain why liberals would not have blocked more environmentally risky endeavors elsewhere? Hello. The fool environmentalists and dems blocked Anwar so enough with your silly talk that ignores the real world.
    Ever heard of the EPA ?
    Theres one dept. full of environmentalists that have definitley effected our energy policies.
    Why dont we have as much nuke power as we should have by now ?
    Because environmentalists are always mongering fear by bringing up things like,Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, radiation exposuire, health, waste disposal.
    Evrinmentalists are against oil, drilling and mining but at the same time are unable to come up with a viable means to replace it quick enough to satisfy the countrys needs.
    I see it this way.
    What oil we do drill for and come up with should suffice within the time it takes to get all other alternative sources of energy on line.
    Nuke, hydrogen, hybrid applications solar, thermal,tidal generation etc should be covering a large enough portion of our needs in 10-20 years to the point where our need for oil would be minimal.
    Minimal enough to release from dependency on middle eastern oil.
    Bio fuels have already proven to be a completely stupid move.

    But please.
    If any one is a liar. It is those who expect us to believe that environmentalists do not effect , control or in a large way make our energy policies.
    Try and build a new dam, or a nuke plant, or drill somehwere, maybe start mining for all the shale we have in those hills and see who the first people are who throw up the hurdles.

  13. ANWAR is a political scapegoat for simplistic thinkers. Two-thirds of the open lease land for drilling sit empty. The oil companies aren’t drilling. Why should they? They’re making a fortune. Refineries, what few there are, run at just over 80% capacity. That’s pathetic. There are plenty of refinery leases to go around, but no one’s building any. Why should they? Again, they’re making a fortune. One would have to be economically illiterate not to understand this.

    And we are not “dependent” on middle eastern oil. 2/3rds of our oil comes from North America and another 15 or so percent from Venezuela. The middle eastern oil is, however, a large part of global oil supplies and oil is traded in global commodities markets. And that’s why trouble in the Middle East effects the entire market.

    All this aside, only a liar or a fool would think we can drill our way out of a dependency of 25% of the world’s oil with only 2-3% of the reserves. The last thing we should be doing is fusinng over how to get more oil. We have to look at some other sources of energy.

    JMJ

  14. Micky 2 says:

    JMJ;
    “The last thing we should be doing is fusinng over how to get more oil. We have to look at some other sources of energy.”

    Obviously what I wrote did not sink in.
    The point I was contesting was the one you made that environmentalists do not effect our energy policies.
    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Anwar connects directly to the point I was making thathad we tapped that resource earlier it would be of a benefit now. If we tap into it now by the time we are able to actually bring a product other available means of energy will be available to the public. So what oil we do pump ourselves in the near future should suffice.
    This would give us that ability to not depend on the supplies we do get from the middle east.
    I offerd a respectable scenario and some decent ideas.
    All you are doing is bashing for the sake of bashing and have nothing constructive to add.
    Why should any oil company invest in new refineries when its beggining to look as if oil will not be such a hot commodity in the future ?
    Only someone who is finacially stupid would think thats a good idea
    Fussing over more oil is necessary at this point and time.
    Look around you. How much longer will our transportation systems and infrastructure be dependant on oil ?
    Untill they break down and wear out.
    And so we cannot just “switch” automatically as so many of your kind would like us to.
    This is why I made the suggestion referring to 10 to 20 year assimilation period.
    Also,it is already known that the reserves in the middle east are projected to last longer than others in production today.
    Regardless of what you say. We are dependant on the rest of the world for 50% of our oil. Replacing what we bring in from the middle east would bring our self sufficiency up 25 % away from import.
    Do you want to depend on Venezuela ? Nigeria ?

  15. Micky, the oil companies are right now sitting on 68 million acres of leased land and water and they are NOT drilling. Why should we give them more land to NOT drill on??? What don’t you get about this???

    And your numbers are all bogus. We do NOT get 50% from ourselves. We can NOT up another 25% with what we have. Where are you getting these lies from??? Fox???

    JMJ

  16. jweaver says:

    John McCain, if elected, will not govern as a conservative because he is not one. John McCain is John McCain, he believes whatever he believes without the benefit of an intellectual movement. He governs by “his gut” and does not seem to care about Federalism, the Constitution, or his party. He has an over abundant ego and temper, both are detrimental to successful term in office. If I vote for McCain, it is because the alternative is worse. John McCain is a hero, but heroes are not always great leaders.

    As for GWB, he ran as a compassionate conservative and reigned as a liberal. Increase spending, increased Federal power in all areas of the lives of citizens and a general disregard for the American public displayed through his lack of proper communications to the electorate. As a leader he is wanting. I cannot say that I will miss GWB anymore than I missed his Daddy.

  17. Micky 2 says:

    12.5% of 50 is 25% jersey.
    That 68 million is vacant of any reserves jersey.
    Dont think these guys would be on it like white on rice if it were worth it ?
    They want to drill where they “KNOW” there is oil.
    Get some facts bro.

    JMJ;
    ” Where are you getting these lies from??? Fox???”

    No, from one of your own liberal moonbat websites.
    The site backs a couple of your numbers, but also contradicts much of the garbage you call truth.

    http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=vn355energyfactsed

    “Amount of U.S. oil consumption that comes from U.S. production: 7.3 mbd, or 42 percent. We produce fifty percent more oil than Iraq and Kuwait, almost as much oil as Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. Nevertheless, we import more than half the oil we use.

    Amount of U.S. oil consumption that comes from the Middle East: 2 mbd — 12 percent, only three percent from Iraq and Kuwait. The rest of our imported oil comes from places like Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, Algeria, Ecuador, and England.”
    That “more than half” is made only by a few digits
    42% is not far from half.

    Whatever, the only person stupid enough to think hes running against Bush is Obama

  18. jweaver, it’s just so conventient to blame the complete and total failure of the Bush administration on him being “liberal,” isn’t it? Too bad for you that no educated American would believe such a silly, ludicrous thing. nice try at the ol’ bait ‘n switch, though.

    Micky, here: http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/images/EC_2_lg.gif That’s from Heritage. you know, that radical fringe leftist think tank. We produce only a third of our cosumed crude.

    JMJ

  19. Lance says:

    eric,

    Looks like I’m all squared away. Have already changed URL link fot TE on my blogroll. New blog space looks great. Thanks for the invitation allowing me to track some mud on your new carpet;)

    Lance from TMQ2

  20. Micky 2 says:

    Jersey, thats still a far cry from the numbers you originally cited and has absolutley nothing to do with finding a solution or the fact that most of your info is crap.
    Including the number of acres we are suppoosed to drill on.
    The Saudis produce 10.72 million barrels daily, Russia, 9.67 and the U.S. 8.37 million. But consumption is 20.59 million barrels a day, making net imports 12.2 million a day. That adds up to more than 33% as you would have me believe.

    I like how now you change it to “consumed” oil.
    Please, from now on at the beggining of each debate let us know ahead of time what asinine hairs you would like to split so we can decide with forethought if the debate will even be worth it or not.

    The point is this.
    What oil we can supply ourself with in the near future will be enough once we get all other forms of energy applicable, viable and on line. So we should start drilling everywhere.
    You’ld think that after that mess with Carter we would of learned our lesson.

    The other point is that no matter what BS you try to spread environmentalists most definatley do impact if not dictate a huge portion of our energy policies, as I have proven.

    Also still, all you do is whine and cry at the table.
    You just go off on another one of your rants

  21. Norm says:

    I used to think Dick Morris knew the Clintons better than anyone else but that thought has dissapated to the realms of never-never land. Also, his appearances on O’Reilly and Hannity & Colmes have sometimes contradicted his own opinions and predictions…predictions change with the weather. It is my own opinion, and I have been fairly accurate with my own forecasts, that Hillary will be Obama’s choice for VP…regardless what the pundits express on the national venues. My biggest concern is not the candidates manufactured issues but the closed door Saul Alinsky peppered discussions on how to snowball the electorate for a win-at-any-cost election. Both Obama and Hillary come from the same Alinsky-Cousins School of Socialism and they both scored high marks in their academia pursuit of a Brave New World…these are the real issues but they also control the mainstream media that prevents public dialogue.

    ps: I once stated that I knew the Clintons better than anyone who has never met them…and now I think I know them better than Dick Morris.

  22. ACHefty says:

    Test Comment…

  23. Micky,

    “Jersey, thats still a far cry from the numbers you originally cited”

    Where. Show me what I cited.

    Of the oil we consume, we only produce about a third. That’s it. How else would you like me to say it? Should I mention the oil we don’t consume? This is America, right?

    We have to get off oil. It will continue to be there for a long time whether we subsidize it, fight for it, beg, borrow or steal it. In the inevitable time known as “meantime” we have to fully engage in creating a national grid (in the vein of Ike’s highways), going full throttle with solar, wind and anything else we can use (including nuclear, for whatever its worth), and let the oil business die of old age a couple hundred years from now.

    What you have against that is completely beyond me.

    And if you think only environmentalists practice NIMBY or whatever variant thereof, then you haven’t a clue what that issue is about. Try telling a bunch of rich California coasters they have to stare at an oil rig from the dining room bay windows. This is more complicated than you think. And sure, those wealthy coasters play themselves as libs rising against Big Oil in the name of the regular shmucks, and sure some of those shmucks buy it, but it doesn’t change the math – if it was worth it to continue a pace of drilling to keep up with todays demand the oil companies would do it. They’re NOT doing it because they DON’T have to. The only way an industry like that can survive is if it rigs itself to the government. Big Oil is now a Welfare State for all intents and purposes.

    JMJ

  24. Going to go change your URL at my blog.

    God Bless,

    Pastor Ed

  25. Micky 2 says:

    JMJ;
    “What you have against that is completely beyond me.

    That was an incredibly disengenuous statement.
    If you read my post I pretty much have already said what you just said, but in more descript terms.
    I said;
    “What oil we do drill for and come up with should suffice within the time it takes to get all other alternative sources of energy on line.
    Nuke, hydrogen, hybrid applications solar, thermal,tidal generation etc should be covering a large enough portion of our needs in 10-20 years to the point where our need for oil would be minimal.
    Minimal enough to release from dependency on middle eastern oil.
    Bio fuels have already proven to be a completely stupid move.”

    Please learn to read a little better. you are only repeating what I have already said.

    You said;
    “In the inevitable time known as “meantime” we have to fully engage in creating a national grid (in the vein of Ike’s highways), going full throttle with solar, wind and anything else we can use (including nuclear, for whatever its worth), and let the oil business die of old age a couple hundred years from now.”

    I never said only environmentalists practice NIMBY, did I ?
    But I have proven with out a doubt they are more responsable for the hurdles than anyone else.
    And by you saying they practice NIMBY you are admitting that they effect our env. policies after you said only a fool would believe it.
    As I also pointed out, the EPA is the lkargest collection of environmentalists that most definitley do effect our env. policies.
    Are you going to say I’m a fool for knowing this as fact ?

    I know more about this than you obviously.
    You arent even aware that the 68 million acres are dry. And you are just parroting what the lib media has been spewing for the last week.
    From their bay window ?
    No! The fact you are unaware of (again) is that these riggs are too far off the coast to be seen.

    You said we use less than 30 % of our oil and only produce that much.
    Since we get less than 60 % from the rest of the world where do think the remainder comes from ?

    Dems and environmentalists are responsable for the shortages we see today.

  26. inkslwc says:

    Test comment – I like the new look!

  27. Micky 2 says:

    JMJ;
    “Where. Show me what I cited.”
    JMJ;
    “All this aside, only a liar or a fool would think we can drill our way out of a dependency of 25% of the world’s oil with only 2-3% of the reserves.”

    That means that of the 100% we bring in we have 8 to 12% of the reserves. And of that 8-12% its all ours.

    25% x 4 = 100%
    2-3% x 4 = 8-12%

    That leaves the other 92 to 88% having to come from somehwere else.

    Your numbers make no sense if we recieve 2/3rds of our oil (66%) from North America and another 15 or so percent from Venezuela. 15% +66%= 81%.
    It doesnt jive with the math(your numbers) above .

    There never was any doubt on my part that we didnt get the majority of our oil from the rest of the world.
    My point was to controvert your claim that environmentalists do not control ouir environmental policies.

    You said;

    “we have had enough of high gas prices and environmentalists controlling our national energy policies!!!”
    On what planet do you reside where “environmentalists” control “our national energy policies?”

    You said that this claim was a lie.
    In essence you are calling the man a liar.
    And since I agree with him, you would be saying I am a liar also.

    You as a matter of fact are responsable for contributing to the lie that environmentalists are not in control of our energy policies.
    As a matter of fact they are, to a very large extent.
    By you not answering a single one of my questions on that subject in this thread I can only assume you dont have anything to make me a liar or to present yourself as the bearer of any truth in this department.

    What do you think the majority of viable employees do at the EPA ?
    Who do you think it was that established the EPA ?
    Who do you think the EPA gets its research results and stats from ?
    What dept is solely responsable for more impact on environmental laws and regulations than the EPA ?
    Take a tour to the EPAs website and take a look at all the environmental agencies involved in contributing to our env. policies.
    http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-programs/state-and-local/state-best-practices.html

    Please now.
    Take your silly little claim and try it on someone who bought one of those bridges you have been trying to get rid of for so long.

  28. Burp!
    Cheap Vodka, and good beer! That’s my motto! Anyways, thanks Eric for the rapid response over at CLO about the Haditha Marines.

    This is a rather interesting thread. Some actually have a grasp of economic theory, and others pretend too. Kind of like Jim Jones verses the local Rabbi or Priest…

  29. Comment posted, I finally got it to work!

    Dick Morris is a very astute political observer, but let’s not forget that he was screeching through so many of the early Democratic Primaries that Hillary’s selection as that party’s Presidential nominee was “inevitable”……….

    BHG

  30. Changeover to new URL done. Good luck.

  31. Right Truth says:

    The new place looks great.

  32. jweaver says:

    Jersey, Bush simply has not lead a conservative government, nor has he run a government consistent with his 2000 election. Just look at the Rice actions in the Middle East. Bush faulted Clinton for the inept shuttle Diplomacy looking for a last minute cure for the middle East, Just what is Bush doing that differs from that? look at no child left behind – where is the conservatism there? Huge new entitlements like prescription drugs? Creation of countless new departments? Please point out t me exactly where Bush rules as a conservative.

  33. DocattheAutopsy says:

    I’m posting from a Mac!

    By the way, you’re all wrong.

    And you’re all right.

    Glad I could contribute.

  34. thepoliticaltipster says:

    Eric,

    I do have to disagree with you about McCain running to the centre. It is obvious that the attempt to run on a hard right tax cutting agenda isn’t working, and more importantly is something that McCain doesn’t believe in. In reality McCain is a right of centre populist who believes in free trade, school vouchers and attacking wasteful spending but also believes in regulatory reform, global warming, expanding access to health care and is worried about inequality. He also supports issues such immigration reform, energy independence and balanced budgets which are neither right nor left. Just as his best moment on foreign policy came when he directly confronted Ron Paul, his best two domestic policy moments came when he attacked Romney (and implicitly Giuliani) over the ‘profit not patriotism’ line and Huckabee over his regressive tax plan.

    The Democratic lead on economic issues and their lead in the generic ballot means that there is simply no popular appetite for further economic conservatism. Obviously, Dick Morris is the last person who should be giving policy advice and his stuff about oil speculators and companies is simply demagogic nonsense. However, McCain could bring on board people like Marshall Whitman and Irwin Seltzer who could help him move to the centre while still remaining to the right of Obama. This will probably mean touting the fact that his healthcare plan means a tax credit for even non taxpaying families and talking about his battle for a patients bill of rights and his role in trying to reform corporate governance. After all, if the base already considers him, in Dean Barnett’s words, ‘a Scoop Jackson Democrat living under the Republican “big tent.”’, (or a socially conservative version of Tony Blair) then he might as well get the electoral benefits that come with such a designation.

  35. JLR says:

    Eric, sounds like you had a fine time hobnobbing with Morris, et.al. in the slums of Santa Barbara. Couldn’t you find a decent venue?

    Serious now: Watching Dick Morris on Fox during the late unpleasantness between Hillary and Obama, I gained a new respect for him.

    Great post.

  36. jweaver says:

    Now Bush gives a Presidential medal of Freedom to Socialist Donna Shalala – Yeah, he is the King of Conservatives…

  37. Jim-Rose says:

    New site looks great!

  38. jweaver, when you look at Bush’s record on regulations for example – pretty much every agency, from the FDA, to the USDA, the FTC, the CFTC, the MSHA, and on and on and on – we have a record of extreme conservative laizzez faire governence and it’s been an unmitigated distaster in every single case. As for his “liberal” programs, most all have been nothing more than give-aways to GOP-friendly industries and contractors. And speaking of contractors, the conservative privatization movement, which has also been a complete and total failure, we now have more private contracts on the public dole than ever before and they are far more expensive and far less effective than the public institutions they replaced or created in extant.

    Bush is a neocon. His historically unpecedented failure as a president is all the proof you need.

    JMJ

  39. Micky 2 says:

    When his term is over you can accuratley use the word unprecedented.
    Carter has preceded as the biggest failure so far.
    I dont know which institutions you are talking about but the private sector has almost always been more efficient at anything.
    Unmitigated ? yea right. 100% failure in every case ?
    Failure makes you a neocon ? Thats rich.
    BDS to the max bro.

  40. Well, you caught a little of my sarcasm there, Micky, but I stand by what I said. I can’t think of any success stories from the neoconservative movement. It’s not a matter of percents, it’s a matter of positive results of cost/benefit analyses.

    JMJ

  41. Micky 2 says:

    If you cant think of one success story from the neocons its truly not a matter of percents. In regards to brain cells it would be a negative result of 0%.
    If you actually applied the term “neo conservative” in its proper context to the past political landscape in the last 30 or so years it is actually responsable for a ton of success stories.
    But this 100% failure you apply to neo conservative movements and its 100% lack of successes falls into the realm of those who (like you) will reject anything connected to it out of unwavering biased hatred.
    Its no different than that delusional claim that everything Bush has done has failed.
    Its ludicrous and childish.

  42. infidel308 says:

    Hmmm… I can comment on this article, but not the current one.
    Site looks good though.

  43. Jack says:

    Jack…

    What a strange few weeks,do you think Obama can go all the way?…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.