No Fuel-Comment from Paul

Dear TRM,

Maybe you should be “the Rational Moderate” rather than radical. It seems we are woefully short on “rational” in this country. Or perhaps the pragmatic moderate? Or the radical pragmatic?

Concerning your commentary on the energy crisis, what is coming is nothing short of an industrial revolution in energy. How we get there is another story. The “free market” forces of the right think that method most efficient to achieving energy independence. That it really is the most efficient method of enriching an already incredibly wealthy class of people. The left feels a full-on guvmint style program the answer. Hardly. There are too many individual special interests and agendas on the left for any semblance of efficiency. The war between to two sides promises a prolonged an inefficient process cheered on by OPEC and anyone else with their straw in the oil barrel.

The next president (you don’t think this one will do it, do you?) will have to have vision enough to “take us to the moon”. Kennedy grappled with the Soviets and that was a political win. Some say that this crisis does not have the political impetus to fuel (no pun intended) a revolution in energy. I beg to differ. People think that “Big Oil” is the problem. They forget that 70 percent of the world’s oil is produced by nationalized companies. I think the American people are tired of kowtowing politically to the OPEC countries. They are willing to change the way they live. What we need is leadership.

My belief is a Kennedy “moonshot” or FDR “Manhattan” style program is the answer. It could encompass the positive aspects of both sides politically and allow the oil-types a seat at the table. No program will succeed unless big oil can play. T. Boone Pickens is smart enough to know that. That is why he decided to take it upon himself to just take a seat, invited or not.

The next president should commission a blue ribbon panel of scientists, engineers, industrialists and big oil types and charge them to develop a plan to wean us of foreign oil in 10 years and wean us off of fossil fuel energy altogether in 20. Our approach in doing this will be in several overlapping phases that will get us from point A to point B in the most efficient way. How we use energy and where we use it must be addressed. Heating and lighting our homes, large and small transportation (cars, trucks, airplanes), manufacturing, and the needs of municipalities are just a sample of the types considered. Boone Pickens recognizes the “geography of energy” where wind in the middle states and sun in the southwest are logical answers to electrical needs.

We went to the moon starting with the small step of a 12-minute sub-orbital flight crewed by Alan Sheppard. Men envisioned the steps they would have to master to get to the moon and back…and then we did them. Getting to fuel cell cars will require cheap, renewable, non-carbon producing electricity (solar, wind, geothermal, tidal). Getting to mass biofuels for aircraft, biodiesel-electric trains, and biodiesel shipping trucks, ocean shipping and smaller boats will require advancements in switchgrass and algae biofarms. But that is a way off. It’s the last step. Until then, ALL energy sources to get us off foreign oil must be considered. Namely, offshore drilling, clean coal shale (Colorado), drilling for new reserves in the Dakotas and Montana and nuclear. This first step is a necessary compromise. This would stem the wealth transfer of the US to the OPEC countries and place investment back in the US where it belongs. This unpalatable first step would be done with the understanding that all US drilling and fossil fuel production would end in 30 years and all nuclear plants decommissioned in 40 years when the renewable conversion is complete.

We have the technology. We need the national will and political leadership to accomplish this.


Paul-

Thanks for your comments. In this age of the sound bite and issue-free campaigning, a rational and reasoned discussion of the issues is "radical". Invite your friends to join the fun here.

TRM

No Fuel- Comment by Anonymous

I'm no engineer, but given that we've been on the kick of oxidizing carbon-based fuels of all kinds for the entire history of mankind (wood, coal, petroleum, natural gas, methane, etc.), as a way to perpetuate our species and ensure some standard of living, it's going to be a major paradigm shift to find some other way to meet our energy needs in the future while preserving the environment. Finding some way to enhance the electric power grid and distribute power will be one challenge, but finding methods of generating the capacity necessary to operate that grid will be yet another.

Wind offers one avenue, but I also think that greater use of solar technology is necessary as well. For that matter, geothermal and hydroelectric potential (both ocean and river current) is also ripe for further exploration. That any of these options are yet not economically feasible should be no bar to some sort of Government subidies or grants. Of course, the current occupants will likely not easily abandon their own dependence on foreign petroleum.

There's No Fuel Like an Old Fuel

Hydrogen versus Direct Electric

In the new age of gasoline-free automobiles, the ultimate decisions will be made by the automobile companies regarding the power source for our engines. Will they be Hydrogen based fuel cells or rechargeable batteries that hook into your home ac circuit?

It seems that everyone is in love with the idea of the plug-in electric, but I have yet to read an analysis that concerns a basic concept such as where and how will that electricity be generated. It seems that everyone expects electrons to flow out of the house socket as if by wizardry. Those electrons have to come from somewhere, folks, and we have to answers those question soon. Will those electrons come from nuclear plants such as pebble bed reactors? From " clean" coal plants? Natural gas plants? Oil shale fired plants? Wind turbines from the Midwest?

Or will the energy be based on a hydrogen produced and transported by the oil companies who now fuel your car? Can you really believe that Exxon Mobil, Phillips, Conoco, BP, and Shell want to give up their automobile-based profits and turn those dollars over to the electric companies without a fight? Will they allow their distribution and refining facilities to be made as obsolescent as buggy whip and ice factories? Or will they get into the wind turbine and electric business and go head to head with Duke?

The nearly bankrupt general Motors is coming out with the Chevrolet "Volt",ostensibly an electric car, however it comes with a gasoline "range extender" ("engine") to get the car home while simultaneously charging the battery. Good thing, because so far, the batteries on electrics allow only a range of 40 miles, which might be great for in-city errands, but totally unacceptable for taking a decent trip. So what they really are talking about is a $50,000 "station car"."Cheap!" as they used to say on the cover of MAD Magazine.

When you think of it, the hydrogen proponents are living in the same fantasy world as the electric guys. Hydrogen won't be sucked magically out of the ambient air, so where does the hydrogen come from? Here is a posting that you might want to read:

The mass media's fascination with fuel-cell powered cars is understandable. The promise of "clean, cheap energy from water" has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? Unfortunately, it makes better fiction than reality. Hydrogen-powered cars just emit their pollution elsewhere.

In any chemical reaction like the one that powers your car, energy must be conserved; meaning that the energy must "come from" somewhere. So where does the hydrogen "fuel" for a fuel-cell car come from? Two possible sources are

* Water - plentiful and everywhere.
* & Methane - while the U.S. has some methane reserves, we would need to import it from "non-friendlies" in order to meet current (and future) demand.

Let's look at water. First of all, the hydrogen molecules in water are strongly bound to oxygen. Therefore, it takes (substantial) energy to split water into useful hydrogen (used by the fuel cell) and oxygen molecules. The majority of that energy - in America - is derived from coal power. If you take into account that a significant minority of the power grid in America is also nuclear, we have traded a clean-burning gasoline engine for nuclear and coal powered fuel-cells. Since so-called "greens" would never advocate more nuclear power - even though that would be the best solution - we can't and won't power fuel-cell cars from water-derived hydrogen.

If, instead, we power the car by reducing methane (CH4), then we have merely traded one energy source (gasoline) for another (methane) that is far less efficient -- and therefore produces MORE carbon-dioxide per mile traveled than gasoline!

Even though Honda is beginning to produce a hydrogen fuel cell automobile, the FCX they still have not answered the hydrogen production question. Furthermore, hydrogen merely displaces the environmental impact from the end user to the fuel producer for no net environmental gain

Critics also point out that hydrogen is costly to produce and the most common way to produce hydrogen is still from fossil fuels.

Analysis of the environmental impact of different fuel technologies has shown that the overall carbon dioxide emissions from hydrogen powered cars can be higher than that from petrol or diesel-powered vehicles.

I am sure that you have seen those television advertisements with oilman T.Boone Pickens in which he extols the need to develop the wind power present in the Mid-West. Certainly, that area of the country has a lot of potential energy, as the song, "Oklahoma", says, "where the wind comes sweeping down the plains". While Mr. Pickens seems willing to put up a lot of his money to develop this potential, the question of distribution seems not to to be addressed. Does the continental United States electric grid have the capacity to act as an efficient distributor of the electricity generated by wind power, or will the government have to spend billions of dollars in system upgrades and if so, is it worth the expense? An engineer I was speaking with several weeks ago told me that the electric grid system currently operates with a 95% degree of efficiency and the only question that needs to be answered is that of capacity.

We are in a period of uncertainty about future fuels, and no one will be safe placing one bet on the energy craps table. Despite the bleating of the environmentalists, look for more drilling and more efficient gasoline vehicles to predominate until the industry and market both answer some questions regarding fuel production, distribution and efficiency that have yet to be adequately answered. But is Pickens right?

Any engineers want to weigh in on this? Anyone? Bueller?

Pick Up the Phone, Brent Rinehart, the 21st Century is Calling

This would be a total hoot if it weren't real. It is a local election in Oklahoma, and yes, it is a comic book (very telling!). But the folks there should be more than slightly embarrassed about the whole thing.Right-winger Oklahoma County Commissioner Brent Rinehart is running for re-election and he has taken dead-aim at his opponents, which basically includes everyone. He seems to have some powerful, but non-voting opponents!

In one sequence, Satan says: "If I can get the kids to believe homosexuality is normal!”

The angel replies: "Hey Satan, not with Brent around you won't!”

Rinehart said he doesn't think the depiction is inappropriate and that he is proud of the comic.

"The history of my office is that I do expose the homosexual agenda, and that it does exist in the state of Oklahoma, and my history also would show that I am very much opposed to the homosexual agenda,” Rinehart said.

...

Rinehart acknowledged that the comic is edgy at times, but said it explains important issues in a light-hearted way that his constituents will enjoy.

"It makes it interesting and something that people will actually look at and understand,” Rinehart said.

Toga-wearing gays, political figures, trench coat-clad henchmen, concerned residents and Rinehart round out the comic's cast.

"This is one of the strangest things I've ever seen,” said Keith Gaddie, a political science professor at the University of Oklahoma. "I've never seen a comic book with the phrase ‘anal sodomy' in it before. That was a new one for me.”

If I can get a copy of this "comic", I will post it immediately.

More "Disconnect"

The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, here, buttresses my point about the disconnect between the publics feelings about the Republicans in general and John McCain, with the poll showing a statistical tie in preferences for McCain's and Obama's plans for Iraq.

Previous polls showed a preference for withdrawal from Iraq sooner rather than later, a position closer to Obama's stated goal.

I think people are really confused about Iraq. They don't want to leave precipitously if there is a chance that we are on the right road. They don't want to stay if we are in a no win situation. And they don't believe any of the information that both parties are feeding them.

Still, after five years of combat and 4,000 deaths in Iraq, this poll spells trouble for Obama.

A READER COMMENTS on FLIGHTS of FANCY

A Reader writes:

This letter was something unique in my experience. I have never seen an entire industry band together and canvas their customers looking for assistance. These are the same guys who keep providing me less and less on every flight, but I too have noted the record profits being posted by the oil and energy companies. I recognize the market forces that drive prices to these levels, but I feel a gentle upward slope is more natural and beneficial to all.

While I worry about the short term damage to our economy brought about by oil prices, when combined with the mortgage meltdown it is exponentially more frightening. We are looking at long road back to an energetic and robust economy that equals (10 years?) the economy of just one year ago. The DOW has lost 28% of its total value in the past year! There is more bad news to come.

Here is Obama's chance to be a 2nd FDR and oversee our recovery from what will become known as "The Great Depression 2.0". He will rise above partisanship, slash our incredibly bloated government bureaucracy (dismantling the huge worthless sections of DHS), organize a new WPA, and become the most beloved President of the 21st century.

I welcome all of the research and development to come that these high oil prices will bring about. This prolonged situation will finally lead to relief from our dependence on oil and will bring renewable energy sources to primacy. In fact, it may be this that leads us out from the economic doldrums.

Reader,

I agree that we are on the edge of disaster but I don't think we will go over the precipice. Yes, we are in a bear market but that is not unheard of.

What scares me is that we truly are at the end of the age of oil. Despite all of the R&D going on in the field of energy, the transition to a new energy source will be long and painful. Therefore, the climb out will have to account for that change in addition to the economic chaos caused by the sub-prime mortgage disaster. A couple of decades for recovery? How about a century?

Your hope for Obama is far more sanguine than mine (If he gets elected, and I still think that is a big "if"). A Roosevelt comes along only once in history, and even he made his mistakes and was mired in political battles with the Republicans and the Supreme Court. Despite Roosevelt's herculean efforts, the depression didn't end until the beginning of World War 2, when industry shook off the cobwebs and geared up to become "the arsenal of democracy".

And don't look for a Democrat to drastically cut the size of government.

Thanks for writing!

TRM

DISCONNECT

With all polls showing the popularity of the President, the Republicans, and Congress at almost all-time lows this new poll from Newsweek, which shows a statistical tie between Obama and McCain spells big trouble for the Democrats.

The public should be heaping scorn upon failed Republican policies and candidates. It should be a landslide year for the Democrats and Obama should be way ahead, yet he isn't. What happened to those polls just a week ago which showed the Democrat with a 15 percentage point lead over the Republican?

I think the overriding emotion that voters are feeling right now is fear.

Fear of war in the middle east, where nightly TV news shows Iran firing missiles.

Fear of high prices, with gas pumps showing numbers that once existed only on pocket calculators.

Fear of no oil, where even oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens has his own television commercials that says the age of oil is over.

Fear of food shortages, where Brits are asked to adopt the measures that got them through the shortages of World War 2.

Fear of financial disaster, where bank failures are no longer ancient stories of the 1930s depression.

FEAR.

Fear plays into the hands of the Republicans, long thought to be the "Daddy" party, the party of strength, as opposed to the "let's all play nice together and share the toys" "Mommy" Democrats. These aren't the times to gather down by the river and sing "Kumbaya".

So while Democrats may at an advantage in local races and with the pocketbook money issues such as health care, I think the public really wants a guy at the top who wields a big stick and knows how to use it.

Events leading up to the November election will have an out sized influence on the voters.

Make no mistake about it, this is going to be a very, very, tight race.

FLIGHTS of FANCY

A valued and loyal reader of this Blog (and believe me, every reader is valued, and if you come back more than once, you definitely are loyal!) asked me to comment on a letter than recently was e-mailed by all the major airlines to their frequent flier customers. I was just about to settle down to consider a nice paper from MIT on Modular Pebble Bed Reactors, but a request from a loyal reader does not go unheeded here at TRM.

Let's admit right off the bat that the airlines are easy targets. Warren Buffett said that, over the course of its history, if you sum up all the books, no one has ever made a dime in the airline industry. Comedian Alan King used to excoriate the industry with regularity on the old Ed Sullivan Show, and that was in the days when flying was seen as the height of privilege and elegance.

So, I'll just print their letter and insert comments as appropriate. The letter is reproduced unedited except for the name of the recipient, and in full at the end of my posting. My comments are in bold.

Dear (Customer Name),

Last week, crude oil hit an all-time high of $146, and the skyrocketing cost of fuel is impacting our customers, our employees, the communities we serve, and the economy as a whole. (Nothing to argue about here. All are statements of fact.)United, and the majority of other major U.S. airlines, are asking our most loyal customers to join us in pushing for legislation to add more transparency and disclosure in the oil markets.(Let's see. Are these the same loyal customers who you want to rip off with unreasonable fees and a fare structure that is closer to a Las Vegas roulette wheel? Have you ever tried to check fares on line? Go to an airline's website and you get a fare. Back out, check another airline, then come back to the first, BOOM , a different fare ((HINT-Clear your cookies before going back to the first web site!)) And these guys are asking for "transparency"?) Please see the attached open letter from the leaders of the U.S. airline industry.

------------------------------------------------------------
An Open letter to All Airline Customers:
------------------------------------------------------------
Our country is facing a possible sharp economic downturn because of skyrocketing oil and fuel prices,(True enough!) but by
pulling together, we can all do something to help now. (CHECK YOUR WALLET!)


For airlines, ultra-expensive fuel means thousands of lost jobs and severe reductions in air service to both large and small communities. To the broader economy, oil
prices mean slower activity and widespread economic pain. This pain can be alleviated, and that is why we are taking the extraordinary step of writing this joint letter to our customers. Since high oil prices are partly (Which part and how much? This is one of those fuzzy, unsupported-by-fact statements that allow the writer to say just about anything.) a response to normal market forces (How about growing industrial needs in China and India; Iran firing off missiles and Israel practicing bombing Iran; Iran producing nuclear material. As they say, "normal market forces", all of which are totally beyond our control.) the nation needs to focus on increased energy supplies and conservation. However,there is another side to this story because normal market
forces are being dangerously amplified by poorly regulated market speculation. (OW! OW! Mr. Kotter! I know I know!)

Twenty years ago, 21 percent of oil contracts were purchased by speculators who trade oil on paper with no intention of ever taking delivery. Today, oil speculators purchase 66 percent of all oil futures contracts, and that reflects just the transactions that are known. Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and
then sell it to each other again and again (OH, NO! HOW CRIMINAL!). A barrel of oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers pick up the final tab. Some market experts (Some? Which ones? Don't they have names? Shoddy piece of work, this! And what do others say? How about an increase in demand from Asian markets and general market jitters over the Middle East?

I read an article by Paul Krugman in the NYTIMES on June 27th, in which he stated that the increase of oil tracks the price increase in iron, which is not subject to either Mid East politics or speculative pricing.

...iron ore isn’t traded on a global exchange; its price is set in direct deals between producers and consumers. So there’s no easy way to speculate on ore prices. Yet the price of iron ore, like that of oil, has surged over the past year. In particular, the price Chinese steel makers pay to Australian mines has just jumped 96 percent. This suggests that growing demand from emerging economies, not speculation, is the real story behind rising prices of raw materials, oil included.)

estimate that current prices reflect as much as $30 to $60 per barrel in unnecessary speculative costs. (So it is OK for you guys to force us to take part in your speculative game of airline ticket prices, but it is not OK for you to take part in a world-wide speculative market. So which part of "world-wide speculative market" did you not understand?)

Over seventy years ago, Congress established regulations to control excessive, largely unchecked market speculation and manipulation. However, over the past
two decades (Just for the record-two decades equal 20 years. We had Republican administrations in 12 of those 20, including the last eight. Where were you guys? Just the facts, ma'am!), these regulatory limits have been weakened or removed. We believe that restoring and enforcing these limits, along with several other modest measures, will provide more disclosure, transparency and sound market oversight (Don't you just love it? These guys now want "transparency and sound market oversight." I get the giggles from this!). Together, these reforms will help cool the over-heated oil market and permit the economy to prosper. (I love it. They want MORE REGULATION AS LONG AS THEY ARE PROTECTED. How about this, how about more regulation for the airlines. I figure if you want the King's protection, you have to pay for it. Or how about just nationalizing the whole mess and then bringing some rational rate and route structure to the country? As Warren Buffet said, no one has ever made money in the airline business.)

The nation needs to pull together to reform the oil
markets and solve this growing problem (Translation: SAVE US! For US is YOU!

Let's admit that no one likes the airlines anymore. They have an unfair and unintelligible price structure, bait and switch promotions, and front line staff who do their very best to make sure you have a miserable time. For us coach passengers, the airlines try to cram as many people into the smallest space possible without the slightest interest in providing a modicum of comfort. They engage in poor business practices that annoy their customers and they charge for every possible amenity that they haven't eliminated entirely, such as checked luggage((Wait a second!! Checked luggage is not an amenity when the airline loses it!)). How about some honesty, like, "Hey, Folks, We are losing our shirt with these rising fuel prices so we need to raise our base fare, but we won't nickel and dime you to death. And, no, we won't install pay toilets!" How about that?

Nah! Honesty will NEVER work!).

We need your help. Get more information and contact
Congress by visiting StopOilSpeculationNow.com.
http://www.unitedoffers.com/600-1sape/101395/235989/6476e6b9e8423ab2c1287f8e02bf5301

(Fun prediction. Between the Scylla and Charybdis of security needs and fuel prices your flying experience will soon look like this. You arrive at the airport and are lead to a small cubicle where you will strip and then don a one-use paper "flying suit", the better to prevent you from carrying on contraband. You will then be thoroughly sedated and placed into a small coffin-like pallet. Your pallet, will be stacked along with those of your fellow travelers in a cargo-like transport airplane. When you arrive at your destination, you will be given a stimulant and your clothes will be returned.

No security problems. No amenities required. No cabin staff needed.You are now cargo. Thank you for flying with us.)




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dear (Customer Name),

Last week, crude oil hit an all-time high of $146, and the
skyrocketing cost of fuel is impacting our customers, our
employees, the communities we serve, and the economy as a
whole. United, and the majority of other major U.S.
airlines, are asking our most loyal customers to join us in
pushing for legislation to add more transparency and
disclosure in the oil markets. Please see the attached open
letter from the leaders of the U.S. airline industry.

------------------------------------------------------------
An Open letter to All Airline Customers:
------------------------------------------------------------
Our country is facing a possible sharp economic downturn
because of skyrocketing oil and fuel prices, but by
pulling together, we can all do something to help now.

For airlines, ultra-expensive fuel means thousands of
lost jobs and severe reductions in air service to both
large and small communities. To the broader economy, oil
prices mean slower activity and widespread economic pain.
This pain can be alleviated, and that is why we are taking
the extraordinary step of writing this joint letter to our
customers. Since high oil prices are partly a response to
normal market forces, the nation needs to focus on
increased energy supplies and conservation. However,
there is another side to this story because normal market
forces are being dangerously amplified by poorly
regulated market speculation.

Twenty years ago, 21 percent of oil contracts were
purchased by speculators who trade oil on paper with
no intention of ever taking delivery. Today, oil
speculators purchase 66 percent of all oil futures
contracts, and that reflects just the transactions that
are known. Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and
then sell it to each other again and again. A barrel of
oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and
used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers
pick up the final tab. Some market experts estimate
that current prices reflect as much as $30 to $60 per
barrel in unnecessary speculative costs.

Over seventy years ago, Congress established regulations
to control excessive, largely unchecked market
speculation and manipulation. However, over the past
two decades, these regulatory limits have been weakened
or removed. We believe that restoring and enforcing
these limits, along with several other modest measures,
will provide more disclosure, transparency and sound
market oversight. Together, these reforms will help
cool the over-heated oil market and permit the
economy to prosper.

The nation needs to pull together to reform the oil
markets and solve this growing problem.

We need your help. Get more information and contact
Congress by visiting StopOilSpeculationNow.com.
http://www.unitedoffers.com/600-1sape/101395/235989/6476e6b9e8423ab2c1287f8e02bf5301

Robert Fornaro
Chairman, President and CEO
AirTran Airways

Bill Ayer
Chairman, President and CEO
Alaska Airlines, Inc.

Gerard J. Arpey
Chairman, President and CEO
American Airlines, Inc.

Lawrence W. Kellner
Chairman and CEO
Continental Airlines, Inc.

Richard Anderson
CEO
Delta Air Lines, Inc.

Mark B. Dunkerley
President and CEO
Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.

Dave Barger
CEO
JetBlue Airways Corporation

Timothy E. Hoeksema
Chairman, President and CEO
Midwest Airlines

Douglas M. Steenland
President and CEO
Northwest Airlines, Inc.

Gary Kelly
Chairman and CEO
Southwest Airlines Co.

Glenn F. Tilton
Chairman, President and CEO
United Airlines, Inc.

Douglas Parker
Chairman and CEO
US Airways Group, Inc.

Buried in the Paper

From Michael Powell's "Reporter's Notebook" deep within today's New York Times:

Policy, Up Close

Early Tuesday, in Powder Springs, Ga., policy takes flesh before the candidate’s eyes.

Jeana Brown raises her arm in a forest of outstretched hands in the bleachers at the high school and Mr. Obama points to her — “Me?!” “Yes, you” — and voice quaking, Ms. Brown says:

“I am one of your small contributors — $5 actually,” she says.

She wants to tell Mr. Obama, who is talking about the 30 percent increase in the number of Americans who have filed for bankruptcy, about her trailer.

She is 50 and her husband, James, is 48, and they worked and snipped coupons and saved for five years to afford their double-wide trailer. Their credit report had the usual nicks and dents, and so they took a 9.25 percent interest rate on their loan. They relied on their broker’s promise “that if we were good and made our payments, we could refinance at a better rate after a year.”

A year later, Ms. Brown walked back in. The broker told her that because their trailer did not have a concrete foundation — which costs thousands more dollars than they had — she and her husband could not refinance.

A job disappeared and they faced foreclosure. The couple doubled up on interest payments, from $670 to $1,378 per month. They cut off Internet and cable service and held three yard sales — everything must go!

They saved their home.

Now her husband drives a truck six weeks at a stretch and she works two jobs. Ms. Brown’s chest heaves, her voice a quivering reed.

“I tell you, I’m not sure how we keep doing this,” she says.

Obama shakes his head. The gymnasium had gone silent.

“Look,” he says, “Jeana is an example of America. Someone who is working hard, who saved, doing all the right things and then gets put into a financial bind primarily because people took advantage of her situation.”

Afterward, Ms. Brown watches him work the rope line. She has brown hair and piercing eyes and hails from coal country; she is proud to describe herself as a white “redneck.”

Her husband, James, is black. When she heard Mr. Obama’s speech on race in Philadelphia, she wrote her check. “I researched him; he’s real,” she says. “I haven’t voted in 32 years but he’s got mine.”

She touches a reporter’s arm; she’s got a question.

“Do you think we’ll be able to save our trailer?”

Democratic Stupidity

If you read this past Sunday's New York Times you would have come across this story on problems the Dems face in getting their big Denver show together.

Now, any big convention can run into problems, so i wasn't too concerned about that. But these items were a perfect example of the type of liberal totalitarianism that will get them into trouble"

With the Denver convention less than two months away, problems range from the serious — upwardly spiraling costs on key contracts still being negotiated — to the mundane, like the reluctance of local caterers to participate because of stringent rules on what delegates will be eating, down to the color of the food(emphasis TRM).

...

And then there is the food: A 28-page contract requested by Denver organizers that caterers provide food in “at least three of the following five colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple and white.” Garnishes could not be counted toward the colors. No fried foods would be allowed. Organic and locally grown foods were mandated, and each plate had to be 50 percent fruits and vegetables. As a result, caterers are shying away.

Caterers are shying away? What about the rest of America? This is true liberal madness
...

City Councilman Charlie Brown, a political independent, has devoted his monthly newsletter to “Food Fight” over the color-coded rules for convention food and is concerned that plans to handle the thousands of demonstrators expected to attend have not been fully thought out.

While Mr. Brown said he expects the city will “cowboy up” and have a successful convention, the lack of resolution about important issues like the demonstrators and food are “the donkey in the room.”

“We are having people say that they will be leaving town,” said Mr. Brown, who fears that the city could be in a no-win situation with the demonstrators — if there is insufficient police presence, the city could be overrun by them; if the police are overly aggressive, they will be criticized as overreacting.

And caterers, expected to feed the 40,000 people coming to town, are throwing up their hands over the food requirements.

“Everything that the Democrats did got off to a late start,” said Peggy Beck, a co-owner of Three Tomatoes Catering. “It was such an ordeal. We’ve jumped through hoops and hoops to bid on their stuff, and we had to have certain color food so the plates would be colorful.” In the end, the parties that she had been bidding on were canceled to save money. “This was some of the silliest stuff ever,” she added.

Nick Agro, head of Whirled Peas Catering, questioned whether the requirement for local organic food could meet cost constraints. “These were fantastic ideas, but I question who is willing to pay for these extra costs,”(emphasis TRM) Mr. Agro said. “My experience is that it is all coming together slowly.”

...

For the Democratic Party, the danger is that a poorly run convention, or one that misses the mark financially, will reflect badly on the party and raise questions about Democratic management skills. And more worrisome for the Obama campaign is that it will be left with the bill for overruns or fund-raising shortfalls, and that the candidate will have to compete in raising money against a convention effort desperate for cash.

If the Democrats are what they eat, then heed the words of Mr. Agro (isn't that a great name for a caterer?!):

“These were fantastic ideas, but I question who is willing to pay for these extra costs,”(emphasis TRM)

CELEBRATE THE EXPERIMENT-HAPPY 4th (now go light a firecracker!)

As a friend of mine says:

Now, my personal favorite holiday is Halloween. I love the pure chaos of that evening above all other holidays. But following closely behind are the solemnity of Memorial Day and the jubilation of the Fourth. And jubilation it should be, friends. Jubilation and awe. Jubilation for the success of the experiment we began in self-rule 232 years ago. Awe for the beauty and power of the words, the courage of the signers, and the audacity of all those who converted a declaration into a reality between 1775 and 1783.

HAPPY 232nd!

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

Source: The Pennsylvania Packet, July 8, 1776

Too Much Truth

That great blog written by a young Lt. in Iraq is no more, here. It seems he violated some military protocol:

" Due to a rash posting on my part, and decisions made above my pay-grade, I have been ordered to stop posting on Kaboom, effective immediately. Though I committed no OPSEC violations, due to a series of extenuating circumstances – the least of which was me being on leave – my “The Only Difference Between Martyrdom and Suicide is Press Coverage” post on May 28 did not go through the normal vetting channels. It’s totally on me, as it was too much unfiltered truth. I’m a soldier first, and orders are orders. So it is."

Well BZ, Lt. G! You did a great job while you were able to do so.

News from the Front

Thanks to LTC Bob Bateman for pointing out this excellent blog from a LT in IRAQ.

CYBERWAR: Follow-up

The latest on possible Chinese hacking into Capitol Hill computers. From The Hill:

More congressional computers hacked from China
By Jordy Yager
Posted: 06/21/08 03:37 PM [ET]

More Members of Congress have had their computers infiltrated by hackers within China than initially suspected, a lawmaker has revealed.

Reps. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) admitted to having data removed from their Capitol Hill computers last week, but Wolf says there are more.

“I’m not at liberty to say who they are, but there are other members,” said Wolf, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee’s State and Foreign Operations subcommittee.

Computers within the Foreign Affairs Committee, on which Smith serves as a senior Republican, were also infiltrated. Kirk suspects that other committees may have been attacked as well.

“I would suspect that the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, Intelligence, (and) Appropriations committees would all be top targets,” Kirk said.

Wolf and Smith said they believe the hackers focused on them because of their continued objections to China’s human rights violations, and suspected that the hackers were looking for information on dissidents.

The computers of Wolf’s foreign policy and human rights staff, chief of staff, legislative director, and judiciary staff were all attacked.

“They got everything,” Wolf said, at a news conference.

The vast amount of information that the attacks, which occurred over the past two years, may have acquired from the computers has lawmakers concerned that the hackers may be selling it to other countries.

“China has a record of selling things to certain countries,” Wolf said.

...

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he did not know how many offices had been hacked but that the House was taking steps to address the security lapses.

“The Committee on House Administration is working with the House Information Resources people to implement addition safeguards,” Boehner said.

Smith said initially he thought his computers had a glitch or a virus of some kind but after the second time his computers crashed, he knew something was wrong. When he told Wolf about the incidents several months ago, Wolf confirmed it had happened to him as well and proposed to alert their colleagues.

One of the FBI’s highest priority is protecting the United States against cyber attacks and high-tech crimes.

“Computer systems control all critical infrastructures, and nearly all of these systems are linked together through the Internet,” Wolf said on the House floor. “This means that nearly all infrastructures in the United States are vulnerable to being attacked, hijacked or destroyed by cyber means…The potential for massive and coordinated cyber attacks against the United States is no longer a futuristic problem.”(emphasis TRM)

Driving Mr. McCain

There are a couple of interesting stories in today's Washington Post.

This one says that McCain has been achieving a tactical advantage by establishing the issue of the day and forcing Barack Obama to respond. As long as the issue is national security, McCain may be on more solid ground, but how is he going to avoid the pocketbook issues of health care, inflation, and oil? And can you read this paragraph without thinking of McCain's horrendous performance in New Orleans a couple of weeks ago when he stood in front of a bile-green background and smiled as though rigor mortis had set in?

Several Republican supporters of the presumptive nominee said they were puzzled by a series of easily avoidable mistakes, including sloppy political stagecraft and poorly timed comments that undercut McCain's reputation as a maverick.

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE.. WELL, MOSTLY PREJUDICE

This story hits the mark that I established a few weeks ago. Prejudice will have a major impact on this year's election. Race versus age. Will blacks vote for Obama in incredible numbers? Yes. Will that vote take place in states previously safe in Republican hands, such as North Carolina and Georgia. Bet on it. Will the black vote be large enough to give those electoral votes to Obama? Maybe. Will Ohio and Michigan vote for Obama? Maybe, but perhaps not in the numbers that a white Democrat would receive as evidenced by Hillary Clinton's victories over Obama in primaries held in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. (While the Michigan primary was held against party rules, and Obama was not on the ballot there, the demographics of that state correspond closely with those of Ohio and Pennsylvania.) We could see Obama shred the Nixonian "Southern Strategy" that gave the South to the Republicans for forty years, only to lose the election in the more conservative areas of the North.

One the other hand, McCain faces the task of overcoming the perception that he is too old for the job. Obama has already made a thrust in this direction when the said McCain had "Lost his bearings". Certainly, McCain doesn't look as dynamic and youthful as Obama does, and sharing a stage with the lithe Democrat will be a visual disaster for the Republican. Regardless of how his mind operates, the effects of years of torture and imprisonment at the hands of the North Vietnamese is obvious, as McCain moves his body rigidly and with evident pain.

Nonetheless, the Democrats had better realize that, historically, the so-called youth-vote has never materialized, while the geezers flock to the polls.

The demographics, tainted by both racism and age-ism, create far too many permutations for any pollster to accurately tease out to make valid predictions at this time. So while today's poll assessment by the Votemaster still shows a healthy lead for Obama on an electoral college basis, I disagree with his assessments for any state where one candidates lead is less than the margin of error for the poll. That puts into play the following states: Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Missouri, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, a total of 137 electoral votes.

The battle has not yet been fully joined and the issue is in doubt.

Money, Money, Money, Money

If you thought the results of the presidential election was a slam-dunk for Barack Obama, take a deep breath into a paper bag and stop hyperventilating. In politics, a week is an eternity, to coin a phrase, and from today to November is time beyond human comprehension.

Republicans have always been the party of money. Once, I was taxing a small airplane into an FBO at Tampa International Airport just before George Bush was supposed to appear for a fund raiser. The number of large private jets, owned by Republican fat cats, was mind boggling, and it filled the airport parking area.

It seems that the Republican wallets are starting to open for John McCain, as he has just had his best fund raising month. Why not? Where else can Republicans go? They have to protect their position and they can't be accused of abandoning their party's candidate.

Look for the 527 organizations to jump in soon and more mud and muck to fly than you find in a pig sty.

No matter which sports metaphor you like, the game has just started and the final gun doesn't sound until November 4th. As that say in the movie, "All About Eve", "Fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy flight!". The race might not always be to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but never bet against the big money.

Creeps, E-Mail, and the Economy

I came across this story while tracking down some items about those creeps at Bears Stearns who knew the sub-prime mortgage market was about to blow up and yet they continued to advise their clients to invest in these schemes.

These guys seemed to know what they were doing and took active measures to prevent the possible discovery of their wrong-doing by using out of office e-mail:

A few days later, Mr. Tannin, who was known within the group as a worrier, sent an e-mail message to Mr. Cioffi in which he suggested closing down the funds after a report showed that the securities they were holding were rapidly losing value. “If the report was true, the entire sub-prime market was toast,” he wrote to Mr. Cioffi. The sub-prime market looked “pretty dam ugly,” he wrote from his home, early Sunday morning.

It was a radical proposition from one of the funds’ managers, and Mr. Tannin took the precaution of not using Bear’s e-mail system, prosecutors said. He sent the note to the e-mail account of Mr. Cioffi’s wife.

Ok. So the guy sets up his innocent wife to be involved in his scheme. Creep! (Someone should tell these guys that a call from a public phone booth would make track back a bit harder than using the company e-mail system. Bu they are addicted to their Blackberries and electronic devices. Welcome to the wired world!)

Medicated Nation..

From MILITARY.COM

Antidepressant Use Soars Among Deployed
Stars and Stripes | June 12, 2008
For the first time in history, a sizable and growing number of U.S. combat troops are taking daily doses of antidepressants to calm nerves strained by repeated and lengthy tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a report in Time Magazine.

And from TIME directly:

For the first time in history, a sizable and growing number of U.S. combat troops are taking daily doses of antidepressants to calm nerves strained by repeated and lengthy tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. The medicines are intended not only to help troops keep their cool but also to enable the already strapped Army to preserve its most precious resource: soldiers on the front lines. Data contained in the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team report indicate that, according to an anonymous survey of U.S. troops taken last fall, about 12% of combat troops in Iraq and 17% of those in Afghanistan are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope. Escalating violence in Afghanistan and the more isolated mission have driven troops to rely more on medication there than in Iraq, military officials say.

So we've moved from " shell schock" to "battle fatigue" to "pop a pill".Years ago the Rolling Stones called it "Mother's Little Helper". But now it's the Army's.

Truest Sign that the Economy has Gone to Hell

This from Newsweek:

According to George Flint, Director of the Nevada Brothel Owners' Association, revenue for the 25 businesses in his membership organization is down by as much as 45 percent. The reason: Sex for money may be recession resistant but it's not recession proof. "Business is in a lower slump than I've ever seen it before," Flint says.

End of the World Part Deux

Michael Writes

Think about fusion and fission - opposite processes (creating bonds/breaking bonds) but both release energy. This one is somewhat circular - water to hydrogen to water - it certainly smacks of a perpetual motion machine - but not to worry, as you have read there are many losses in the system. No generation system is very efficient.

Think about nuclear reactors (or gas or coal) - we cause radioactive material to fission at a controlled pace which heats water flowing through a series of pipes which flashes to steam and expands which turns the blades of a turbine which causes a coil to rotate inside another coil which creates and collapses a magnetic field which causes electricity to flow in a wire. Think about all the energy losses in THAT chain. Yes we are a far far way from something that will be as universal as the gas car, but with any luck we'll get there before we run out of gas

And TRM Replies

I would think most informed people, and that includes those people who read this blog, understand about the inefficiencies of engines, and that includes hydrogen devices. My question concerned the relative efficiency of the three step process that the water car uses (water-> hydrogen->water) versus the two step process (hydrogen->water) of a car loaded with hydrogen. Which one is a more efficient system overall? Does the commercial process of creating the hydrogen gain efficiencies in scale? If your water car already has enough electricity to perform electrolysis, why not use that directly instead of losing the overall power through another step in the process. It seems the concept comes awfully close to that of a perpetual motion machine, and we all know that is impossible.


You can bet the oil companies will try to throttle a water car because there is no money for them there. On the other hand, they probably can more easily move into a hydrogen based economy because they currently have a distribution system in place. The same holds true for an electric powered vehicle, as I can see them trying to become a part of the electricity production cycle. But until those companies gain control of our water supplies, I don’t see them backing a water car. You don’t have to go to the local Exxon station to stick a garden hose into your gas tank.


What is certain is that we need to find reasonable alternative fuel sources quickly. Not only are petroleum products used for transportation, but they are also used for hundreds of products that our civilization depends upon.

Fuels

Further information: alternative fuel

* Ethane and other short-chain alkanes which are used as fuel
* Diesel fuel (petrodiesel)
* Fuel oils
* Gasoline
* Jet fuel
* Kerosene
* Liquid petroleum gas (LPG)
* Natural gas

Generally used in transportation, power plants and heating.


Other derivatives

Certain types of resultant hydrocarbons may be mixed with other non-hydrocarbons, to create other end products:

* Alkenes (olefins) which can be manufactured into plastics or other compounds
* Lubricants (produces light machine oils, motor oils, and greases, adding viscosity stabilizers as required).
* Wax, used in the packaging of frozen foods, among others.
* Sulfur or Sulfuric acid. These are a useful industrial materials. Sulfuric acid is usually prepared as the acid precursor oleum, a byproduct of sulfur removal from fuels.
* Bulk tar.
* Asphalt
* Petroleum coke, used in speciality carbon products or as solid fuel.
* Paraffin wax
* Aromatic petrochemicals to be used as precursors in other chemical production.

A partial list of products made from Petroleum (more than 6000 items)

One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest (over half) is used to make things like:

Solvents
Diesel
Motor Oil
Bearing Grease
Ink
Floor Wax
Ballpoint Pens
Football Cleats
Upholstery
Sweaters
Boats
Insecticides
Bicycle Tires
Sports Car Bodies
Nail Polish
Fishing lures
Dresses
Tires
Golf Bags
Perfumes
Cassettes
Dishwasher
Tool Boxes
Shoe Polish
Motorcycle Helmet
Caulking
Petroleum Jelly
Transparent Tape
CD Player
Faucet Washers
Antiseptics
Clothesline
Curtains
Food Preservatives
Basketballs
Soap
Vitamin Capsules
Antihistamines
Purses
Shoes
Dashboards
Cortisone
Deodorant
Footballs
Putty
Dyes
Panty Hose
Refrigerant
Percolators
Life Jackets
Rubbing Alcohol
Insect Repellent
Oil Filters
Umbrellas
Yarn
Fertilizers
Hair Coloring
Roofing
Toilet Seats
Fishing Rods
Lipstick
Denture Adhesive
Linoleum
Ice Cube Trays
Synthetic Rubber
Speakers
Plastic Wood
Electric Blankets
Glycerin
Tennis Rackets
Rubber Cement
Fishing Boots
Dice
Nylon Rope
Candles
Trash Bags
House Paint
Water Pipes
Hand Lotion
Roller Skates
Surf Boards
Shampoo
Wheels
Paint Rollers
Shower Curtains
Guitar Strings
Luggage
Aspirin
Safety Glasses
Antifreeze
Football Helmets
Awnings
Eyeglasses
Clothes
Toothbrushes
Ice Chests
Footballs
Combs
CD's
Paint Brushes
Detergents
Vaporizers
Balloons
Gasoline

Well, you get the idea.

It makes no sense to burn this valuable resource.

All in all, it is pretty remarkable that we are so dependent on oil. We really became dependent on oil beginning in the late 1800, and then our use exploded in the early 1900s. So we are talking about a revolution that is between 100 years and 150 years old, depending on how you are counting. This is an incredibly short period of time in the history of mankind.Take a look at this chronology of petroleum and this Wikipedia entry.


Some other thoughts on the subject. Some of the more radical proponents of alternative fuels maintain that we should not permit offshore drilling. Their catchy phrase is “this is a crisis we can’t drill our way out of.” That may be true, but perhaps we can drill our way through to an alternative fuel age. If we can make the transition to another fuel, or fuels, with a more limited amount of social disruption, I think we need to seriously consider this course of action. Then there is the case to be made for coal, our most plentiful energy resource. Can there be a clean-coal process that does not pollute? And what of its costs?

Wind? Solar? The former creates environmental pollution of other types, such s noise, and wind farms aren’t the most attractive things. But I have seen them in Oklahoma and it makes sense there. Solar is another developing technology that will be used in various ways, from huge solar farms to smaller solar panels and heaters for individual homes. Finally, what about nuclear power? Is this a reasonable alternative? Can we harness the power of nuclear materials without creating hazardous waste that lasts for tens of thousands of years.

I believe the answer lies in a mix of these possible solutions: wind, solar and hydro power where they are practical, nuclear where needed, and hydrogen where possible.

This truly is the end of the world as we know it. But it is not the end of the world.

A New Car!!

A couple of things bothered me about that posting regarding the car that runs on water. I just don't think the physics make sense. Look at the steps: take water, apply electric charge, perform electrolysis, capture hydrogen to mix with air in an electrolysis reaction. The efficiency of this process versus just fueling a car with hydrogen and going through the electrolysis process escapes me. Take a look at this Wikipedia entry on the subject:

Water electrolysis does not convert 100% of the electrical energy into the chemical energy of hydrogen. The process requires more extreme potentials than what would be expected based on the cell's total reversible reduction potentials. This excess potential accounts for various forms of overpotential by which the extra energy is eventually lost as heat. For a well designed cell the largest overpotential is the reaction overpotential for the four electron oxidation of water to oxygen at the anode. An effective electrocatalyst to facilitate this reaction has not been developed. Platinum alloys are the default state of the art for this oxidation. The reverse reaction, the reduction of oxygen to water, is responsible for the greatest loss of efficiency in fuel cells. Developing a cheap effective electrocatalyst for this reaction would be a great advance.

So, I just don't get this one and it sounds like phony physics. If someone can explain it to me, I would appreciate it.


Then there was the story of the new Honda fuel cell car. It was a great story. A non-polluting car .The car for the 21st Century! The I found this story in the New York Times.

Honda will make just 200 of the futuristic vehicles over the next three years, but said it eventually planned to increase production volumes, especially as hydrogen filling stations became more common. On Monday, Honda announced its first five customers, who included the actress Jamie Lee Curtis.

and then this:

Mr. Fukui said the cars cost several hundred thousand dollars each to produce, though he said that should drop below $100,000 (emphasis TRM) in less than a decade as production volumes increase.

This car is not the modern equivalent of Henry Ford's Model T, which the average guy could afford. This is for the ultra-rich and the celebrity class.

If I pay $100,000 for a vehicle, it had better have wings!

It's the End of thte World as we Know it

Cheap petroleum meant cheap gas which meant cars and traveling and suburbs. The Levittowns of the United States would not be possible without the car.

The fact is simple that our society is going to go through a cast upheaval as gasoline because as expensive as bottled water.

Cars will be smaller, slower, and cleaner, like this new one from Honda that runs on hydrogen based fuel cells. Or how about this one that reported runs on ..water!

Of course. no gas means no suburbs, because how are you going to get around without at least one car and an SUV in the garage? People will be moving back to the walkable,high density, public-transport-available cities. At least those who can afford to. While the poor folks, well, they might just live in those devalued McMansions that will hit the market in abundance as a result of a combinations of factors, including the price of gas and the mortgage melt-down. CNN ran with this story.

So, cinch those seat belts a little tighter because it's going to be a bumpy flight for a while as, after 150 years, we turn our economy away from petroleum to.. something, or some things else.

CYBERWAR

Warfare in cyberspace? Game on!

Yesterday, Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA) gave a speech on the House floor in which he admitted several of the computers in his office had been compromised, with the attacks originating in China. Since then, at least two other Congressmen have told similar tales. Wolf's speech, however, was the most specific, in that he suggested he knows what the hackers were after: files on Chinese dissidents he maintains as part of his human rights efforts

Al-Queda already uses the internet to communicate , and recruit. The Washington Post had this story in 2005.

In the snow-draped mountains near Jalalabad in November 2001, as the Taliban collapsed and al Qaeda lost its Afghan sanctuary, Osama bin Laden biographer Hamid Mir watched "every second al Qaeda member carrying a laptop computer along with a Kalashnikov" as they prepared to scatter into hiding and exile. On the screens were photographs of Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta.

And the U.S. Air Force has reactivated 'The Mighty 8th", to fight in a new environment here and here.

Fill in the Blanks

Here is a really fun site. If you want to play expert pol, pick the winning combinations for your favorite presidential candidate. Need Florida or Ohio? See how a win there, or any other state, effects the outcome of the election.

Great fun for the whole family, especially if your name is Rove or MacAulife.

Save Your Newspaper!

It's a simple fact: most newspapers are deep in the red and as a result , they are closing down or severely trimming their all-important news gathering operations.

The New York Times reports on changes coming to the Los Angeles Times under its new owner, businessman Sam Zell. How best to describe the new Los Angeles Times? How about a newspaper with no news?

Healthy newspapers perform important services in our democracy. They keep government in check. They keep citizens informed. They advocate.

Bloggers depend on their news gathering ability.

So do yourself and your country a favor and get a subscription or two to some good newspapers today!

Grace versus Gauche con't..

From "Murk Water"

Well-expressed! Hillary has shown her true colors many times, but seldom as brazenly as last week. I like to tell myself that enough people finally saw this during the campaign that they recognized a better candidate when they saw one (Obama).

Idle Speculation

With each party having its presumptive Presidential candidate, people with idle hands and minds will speculate on each party's potential vice-presidential candidates. Since I have some time to waste today, I think I'll join the fun.

For the Democrats, I think they have some intriguing possibilities. Try these: Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia. Nelson is a moderate Democrat who can bring into play his connections to try to win those critical Florida electoral votes for the Dems. He nicely balances Barack Obama in the areas of geography and philosophy. Richardson was the Democratic candidate with the most high-level experience and is well qualified to be president. Webb can put Virginia in play, but he is a recent Democrat, having been a lifelong Republican and Ronald Reagan's Secretary of the Navy. A better choice might be Virginia Gov. Time Kaine, but he would take the VP slot only if he could maintain his current position should the Dems lose in November. Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania has been mentioned in an attempt to wrap up that state's electoral votes, but Rendall is Jewish and a ticket comprised of a black and a Jew... well, I don't think we have progressed that far.

On the Republican side, McCain can really steal some of Barack Obama's thunder if he convinces Alma Powell to allow her husband, Colin, to take the VP slot. Condeleeza Rice is possible but not probable, and Mitt Romney is also mentioned, but Romney can't deliver either the conservative Republican base or Massachusetts. My favorite is Powell. I think McCain might make a radical move and pick Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who has been by his side almost constantly. Lieberman, the 2000 Democratic VP nominee is on the outs with his party ever since the leftists there got behind Ned Lamont to unseat him in a primary. Lieberman now considers himself an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats, but some Dems want to toss him out of the party even though his voting record is one that any Dem, except a leftist, would be comfortable with. If McCain want to emphasize his "maverick status", keep your eyes on Powell and Lieberman.

"Communitainment"

Bill Moyers on the need for quality media/journalism, corporate influence on journalism, and the effects on our democracy.

Moyers's speech at the National Conference for Media Reform yesterday.

Thanks to NYLIB for sending this to me.

6 June

6 June 1944. D-Day. Unfortunately, the significance of this date is fading from our collective memory as the population that lived through this momentous day leaves this mortal coil.

D-Day, known for the allied invasion from England, across the English Channel and to the shores of Normandy, placed the forces of the democracies in France. Those who study these matters know it was an incredible feat of arms. My late father-in-law, who was in the embarcation ports in southern England, told me he remembers that, from horizon to horizon, the sky was filled with aircraft headed to England.

D-Day. It indicates the day of a military action. There were many "D-Days". Africa. Italy. Gaudalcanal. Peleliu. Okinawa. Iwo Jima. Anzio. Attu. Kiska. Leyte.

On 6 June, let us remember all of those "D-Days" and all of those men who offered up the ultimate sacrifice, that we might today enjoy our freedoms and follies.

Grace versus Gauche

Hillary Clinton showed her true colors tonight, and it wasn't pretty. With all Democrats readily conceding that Barack Obama has won the nomination, Hillary refused to do the right thing by conceding to reality and throwing her support to Obama. She missed an opportunity to heal the deep divisions that formed as a natural consequence of the primary battles. She failed to heed the words of the famous Tammany Hall politician, George Washington Plunkett, who said, "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em." She could have healed her party and been a leader.

With one gracious act, she could have boosted the candidacy of the Democratic candidate. Instead, what we saw was her dung colored ego demanding more television time, more newspaper ink, and more aggravation. She asked her supporters to write to her website with their opinion on her next course of action. How craven! What an incredible lack of leadership and sense of party.

Barack Obama's speech stood in very sharp contrast to Hillary's. Obama was able to articulate an overarching concept of his vision of the United States and the goals of his administration. I don't think I've heard a better speech since Ronald Reagan was in office, as Obama echoed Lincoln and King. As I always say, if you are going to steal, steal from the best, and Obama did.

Everyone will surely note that approximately forty years since Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, since Freedom Riders rode through the south, since Dr. King marched in Selma and had a dream in Washington, and since Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1964, a black American is the candidate of a major political party. We have witnessed history.


Now people will press for Obama to offer Hillary the VP slot on the ticket. There are so many reasons for not doing this: Hillary is the Washington insider and change opponent that Barack is running against; Hillary is still one of the most polarizing figures on the political scene; Hillary will not deliver one state more than John Kerry won in 2004; and certainly, Hillary kept her campaign open when she could have resolved all outstanding issues by withdrawing, thus committing an ultimate egotistical and selfish act. Don't do it Barack.

The Question Now...

The question now is whether Hillary has enough sense to leave now, or whether she stays in the battle and weakens the party.

FROM AP

WASHINGTON - Democratic party officials said a committee agreed Saturday on a compromise to seat Michigan and Florida delegates with half-votes after Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton failed to get enough support to force their positions through.

The deal was reached after committee members met privately for more than three hours, trying to hammer out a deal, and announced in a raucous hearing that reflected deep divisions within the party. The sticking point was Michigan, where Obama's name was not on the ballot.

Clinton's camp insisted Obama shouldn't get any pledged delegates in Michigan since he chose not to put his name on the ballot, and she should get 73 pledged delegates with 55 uncommitted. Obama's team insisted the only fair solution was to split the pledged delegates in half between the two campaigns, with 64 each.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

The committee agreed on a compromise offered by the Michigan Democratic Party that would split the difference, allowing Clinton to take 69 delegates and Obama 59. Each delegate would get half a vote at the convention in Denver this summer, according to the deal.

They also agreed to seat the Florida delegation based on the outcome of the January primary, with 105 pledged delegates for Clinton and 67 for Obama, but with each delegate getting half a vote as a penalty.

The resolution increased the number of delegates needed to clinch the nomination to 2,118, leaving Obama 66 delegates short but still within striking distance after the three final primaries are held in the next three days.

Obama picked up a total of 32 delegates in Michigan, including superdelegates who have already committed, and 36 in Florida. Clinton picked up 38 in Michigan, including superdelegates, and 56.5 in Florida.

Obama's total increased to 2,052, and Clinton had 1,877.5, according to The Associated Press calculations.

Rules and By-Laws

Today the Democrat's Rules and BY-Laws committee meet to settle the question of the Florida and Michigan primaries which were held in contravention of party rules. The party leadership in both states jumped the gun and scheduled their primaries too early in the political season. Hillary "won" in both Florida and Michigan, but Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan so the people there didn't have a a fair choice.

Hillary wants all the votes apportioned in accordance tot eh results of the votes in those states, but that will never happen. The national leadership must maintain some semblance of order--admittedly, hard for Democrats to do--and so they will compromise and give each delegate only half a vote.

They result will leave Obama with a substantial lead in delegate strength with primary season ending this week. The only question for Hillary is whether to take the classier route and withdraw after the primaries, and thus allow the various factions in the party sufficient time to lick their wounds and rally behind Obama and prepare for the battle with McCain. Hillary's alternative course of action is to keep the pot boiling until the convention in August and wage a floor fight based on two theories. First, she can argue that the Florida and Michigan delegates should be seated at full strength and the delegates apportioned in accordance with the votes in those states. Second, she can argue that as a result of seating the Florida and Michigan delegations at full strength, the number of delegate votes needed for the nomination then increases to 2250 from 2050. If Hillary chooses this latter course of action she will damage the party and what is left of her reputation.

The fact is, the PLEO's who have to vote will run to Obama following the last primary. Politicians never want to be the last aboard the bandwagon, and they see Obama's nomination as being inevitable at this point.

Look for Hillary to bow out in ten days.

Memorial Day

No politics today, as I write to honor those who are currently serving their country in uniform, those who have worn the uniform in the past, those who have been wounded in defense of freedom, and those who have given their lives for that precious ideal.

It is both unfortunate and sad that wars are still fought and that warriors are needed.

However, with every bullet fired, with every bomb dropped, and with every missile launched, we degrade and devalue the holiness and beauty that is inherent in our human existence. Therefore, even through the darkest periods of our existence as a species, we must always aspire to a higher level.

I hope we can eventually earn the peace prophesied by Isaiah and others:

<< Isaiah 2:4 >>

American King James Version
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.


Isaiah 9:5 For every boot of the booted warrior in the battle tumult, And cloak rolled in blood, will be for burning, fuel for the fire.

Isaiah 9:7 There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.

Isaiah 11:6 And the wolf will dwell with the lamb, And the leopard will lie down with the young goat, And the calf and the young lion and the fatling together

Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness will be peace, And the service of righteousness, quietness and confidence forever.

Isaiah 32:18 Then my people will live in a peaceful habitation, And in secure dwellings and in undisturbed resting places;

Hosea 2:18 "In that day I will also make a covenant for them With the beasts of the field, The birds of the sky And the creeping things of the ground. And I will abolish the bow, the sword and war from the land, And will make them lie down in safety.

Joel 3:10 Beat your plowshares into swords And your pruning hooks into spears; Let the weak say, "I am a mighty man."

You've Got to be Carefully Taught

Let's take a look at a couple of items.

I think it is generally agreed that the issues in this election, as of today are: the war, the environment/global warming, the economy-energy, housing, health care, education. And I think that you would agree that the Republicans have made a hash of all of these, close to 4,000 American dead in Iraq, the administration not addressing global warming in a meaningful way, a housing market collapse across the country, etc. etc. and so forth, as they say in The King and I.

These are all real issues that the Democrats can and should own.

The Republicans are bound to counter with their usual assortment of fear items: gay marriage, especially in light of the latest ruling by the California Supreme Court allowing it; illegal immigration and gun control. Not one of these issues impacts on the health of this nation but you can bet that the Republicans will play these cards because they have nothing left after eight years in power and no accomplishments to show the electorate.

This year should be a landslide in favor of the Democrats and, indeed, some pundits are starting to say those words, and they point to the Democratic victories in special congressional election in Louisiana, Mississippi and Indiana, where strong Republican districts elected--GASP!-- DEMOCRATS! But I think that the situation is more complex and not as rosy for the Dems. Let's take a look at some polls.

The electorate believes that the war was unnecessary, has been mishandled, and that we should get out. Take a look at this

Quinnipiac University Poll. May 8-12, 2008. N=1,745 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 2.4.


.


"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"


.

Approve Disapprove Unsure
% % %


5/8-12/08 29 67 4


10/23-29/07 31 65 4


8/7-13/07 29 67 4


6/5-11/07 25 70 6


4/25 - 5/1/07 31 64 5


.


"Do you think going to war with Iraq was the right thing for the United States to do or the wrong thing?"


.

Right Wrong Unsure
% % %


5/8-12/08 33 62 5


10/23-29/07 38 55 6


8/7-13/07 35 59 6


6/5-11/07 37 57 7


4/25 - 5/1/07 39 55 6

Nationally, the presumptive Democratic candidate, Barack Obama leads the presumptive Republican candidate, John McCain by single digit margins only. According to an analysis of several different polls and pollsters performed by Real Clear Politics, the margin in Obama's favor is slightly greater that 3%, well within the margin of error for most polls.

Another warning flare for the Democrats has to be this analysis of individual state polls performed by The Votemaster, which shows McCain handily winning 290 electoral votes, more than enough to take the Presidency.

So what is going on here? Why are the Democrats able to make significant inroads on a congressional level into heavily Republican areas while, at the same time, it appears that their candidate for President is in a statistical tie with the Republican candidate on a national basis and losing to him in the Electoral College?

I think several factors are at play. First, many of the issues we face are economic in nature, and Republican districts are showing that the Republican party has failed them here by voting for the Democratic candidate. As Tip O'Neill used to say, "All politics is local." On the other hand the international security issues are still controlled by the Republicans, even though there is great distress over how the war was being conducted.

You cannot discount the canards that the Republicans are spreading about Obama's patriotism and religious affiliations. So many items are being zapped about the Internet attacking Obama for being a Muslim (he isn't) and for not properly displaying appropriate patriotism by wearing an American flag lapel pin (a practice started by the soon to be impeached Richard M. Nixon) or having his hand over heart heart during the playing of the national anthem. All are false issues.

What may give McCain a boost into the Oval Office is simple: racism. Take a look at this article from the Washington Post:

Racist Incidents Give Some Obama Campaigners Pause

By Kevin Merida
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 13, 2008; A01

Danielle Ross was alone in an empty room at the Obama campaign headquarters in Kokomo, Ind., a cellphone in one hand, a voter call list in the other. She was stretched out on the carpeted floor wearing lace-less sky-blue Converses, stories from the trail on her mind. It was the day before Indiana's primary, and she had just been chased by dogs while canvassing in a Kokomo suburb. But that was not the worst thing to occur since she postponed her sophomore year at Middle Tennessee State University, in part to hopscotch America stumping for Barack Obama.

Here's the worst: In Muncie, a factory town in the east-central part of Indiana, Ross and her cohorts were soliciting support for Obama at malls, on street corners and in a Wal-Mart parking lot, and they ran into "a horrible response," as Ross put it, a level of anti-black sentiment that none of them had anticipated.

"The first person I encountered was like, 'I'll never vote for a black person," recalled Ross, who is white and just turned 20. "People just weren't receptive."

For all the hope and excitement Obama's candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed -- and unreported -- this election season. Doors have been slammed in their faces. They've been called racially derogatory names (including the white volunteers). And they've endured malicious rants and ugly stereotyping from people who can't fathom that the senator from Illinois could become the first African American president.

The contrast between the large, adoring crowds Obama draws at public events and the gritty street-level work to win votes is stark. The candidate is largely insulated from the mean-spiritedness that some of his foot soldiers deal with away from the media spotlight.

Victoria Switzer, a retired social studies teacher, was on phone-bank duty one night during the Pennsylvania primary campaign. One night was all she could take: "It wasn't pretty." She made 60 calls to prospective voters in Susquehanna County, her home county, which is 98 percent white. The responses were dispiriting. One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn't possibly vote for Obama and concluded: "Hang that darky from a tree!"

So while people might express their dissatisfaction with the Republicans by voting for Democrats to preserve their economic interests, they may prefer the Republicans on the national security issues. But it may, in fact, be plain old bigotry that puts John McCain in the White House.

You've got to be carefully taught, indeed.

Michael Writes

I think you may be accused of a poor memory if you do not amend your statement "I can't think of one successful war of independence within the last century that was waged by a people against its own totalitarian regime."

Were the British in India Totalitarian? What about Apartheid in South Africa? The Philippines? I think there are many more and better examples that will crop up if you examine the question.
- Michael

Michael,

Let's examine the question. I established the conditions as follows:

1. It has to occur within the 20th Century;
2. It had to be successful in that it overturned a totalitarian government and replaced it with a long-term, democratic form of government;
3. It had to be waged by a people against its own government.

The British in India were colonial but not totalitarian. Could you possibly imagine Gandhi's March to the Sea under a classic totalitarian government such as the Nazis or Soviets? Further, Indian independence was fought for, and attained, against a foreign colonial power,not a native and indigenous totalitarian regime. Therefore, that does not meet my criterion of "own totalitarian regime."

"The Philippines". Michael, so nice that you just toss this out without any explanation. Are you talking about the Philippine rebellion against Spain in the 19th century? That doesn't meet my threshold of taking place in the 20th century and while the United States certainly was a colonial power in the Philippines, I would not consider its' role that of a totalitarian power as evidenced by the fact that the United States was committed to granting Philippine independence, which originally was to take place in the late 1930s-early 1940s, but which was delayed by World War 2. The United States eventually granted Philippine independence with the successful conclusion of the war. Again, this does not meet the criterion of being fought by a people against its "own totalitarian regime." While Philippine independence took place in the 20th century, it does not meet the threshold of criteria 2 and 3.

South Africa- I would certainly consider the white South African government totalitarian in nature, it was engaged in armed conflict with anti-government forces, and the government was changed to a more democratic form, at least for the time being. There appears to be growing evidence that this nation's government may be tilting in the direction of failure as evidenced by its support of Robert Mugabe's thoroughly totalitarian regime in Zimbabwe. Let's put South Africa on "Pending".

I think a better argument might be made by using the Polish revolution lead by Lech Walesa and his Solidarity movement, which took place prior to the demise of the Soviet superpower and with it, its retreating sphere of influence.

The demise of the Soviet Union was the result of a broad economic collapse. In any event, it now appears that the old Soviet Union, although somewhat diminished in size and reformulated as Russia, has again become totalitarian and under the control of Vladimir Putin of the KGB. Therefor, I would say that the Russian people continue to live under a totalitarian system.

TRM

Tyranny and Freedom in Iraq?

No matter whom you believe, and no matter what you believe to be the proper course of action, one thing is certain: Iraq is a mess.

Frankly, I don't believe anyone who is giving an opinion as all sides have a rooting interest. Leftists delight in the fact that the president was wrong in launching this invasion and occupation. Rightists are like those three monkeys; see no evil; hear no evil; speak no evil, as they ignore what seem to be some very harsh realities staring them in the face.

What are those realities? I know only what I read in the papers but here is what I perceive. Iraq is simultaneously engaged in both a war of independence and a civil war. The war of independence is being waged against is past history of tribalism and totalitarianism.

Since its creation by the British from the remnants of the a portion of the Ottoman Turkish Empire in the aftermath of World War Iraq, a collection of disparate tribal entities, has been ruled by military strongmen who have never allowed democracy to take root there. I can't think of one successful war of independence within the last century that was waged by a people against its own totalitarian regime.

Iraq was firmly in the grip of the Saddamists before the Unites States invasion and there was no viable internal opposition to his tyranny. Totalitarian regimes are like that, as their police state sows fear in the heart of the populace while using its powers to crush--murder--any opponents to the regime. What the United States is trying to do at present is to impose a form of democratic republicanism that has not been nourished internally for more than 100 years, if ever. Further, we are trying to do it in an atmosphere where primitive tribal interests and religious imperatives--Sunni versus Shiite versus Kurd--overwhelm any desire to define or work for a common "Iraqi" purpose.

Thus, we find ourselves in the middle of a political condition that we are unable to define in a manner that would enable us to exert influence in any real and meaningful way. It is now up to the Iraqis to struggle to set their own agenda. The United states cannot impose its own agenda. Instead, we might be able to quietly influence various factions to promote a stable government as we go about our business of killing the monster we created, Al-Qeuda in Iraq.

This retrenchment of our position will enable us to face the greater threat in the gulf--Iran--and the re-formed Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, respectively.