World in Chaos Part 2 | Napa Valley Register

Home » Opinion » Michael Haley

World in Chaos Part 2

Monday, July 14, 2008

Comment

By Michael Haley

Napablogger

October 28th, 2009

One final thought before signing off

September 23rd, 2009

Time for local economic stimulus

August 31st, 2009

Community in a world of chaos

August 20th, 2009

Schwarzenegger finally proposes pension reform

I wrote last time of dark chaos, of the tremendous fears that are swirling around now about so many ongoing issues. But there is also the positive, light chaos that is showing itself in bits and pieces through the fears.

Any change, good or bad, requires a period of chaos during the transition. That is because any change requires destruction of something old, to make way for the new. During the in between period, when the old is being destroyed but the new has not yet taken hold, chaos ensues.

The fears are centered around the issues of global warming, the economy, and the election, along with high gas and food prices. The shock of high prices has reverberated around the world now for several weeks, and the dust is starting to settle a little bit. There is undoubtedly some truth to all theories, but it has become clear that the underlying cause is higher oil demand from the third world. The biggest single source of that demand is China.

The fact is that over the long haul, gas prices are never going to go back down again. Yes, they could dip again for a while, and probably will, but the truth is that third world demand is going to continue to grow rapidly.

That is actually a positive thing, and in the chaos we are going through, it is important to remind ourselves of the tremendous positives going on here.

One thing that means is the third world's economic growth is bringing them out of poverty and heading them into first world status. That alone is absolutely amazing and an incredible thing.

How long has most of the world been swamped in poverty with no apparent way out? We are actually seeing the true beginning of a long term process of increased wealth and the uplifting of millions and even, yes, billions of people out of poverty. That is what all the oil is being used for.

And can you imagine 200 million new upscale wine drinkers in China alone, what that will do for Napa? We won't care about $5.00 a gallon gas at that point.

A richer China will be a happier, more peaceful China. What a huge force for peace in the world they are becoming!

A second conclusion that appears to be settling in is that we have to use less foreign oil, and that to achieve both economic and environmental goals, and to provide enough energy to maintain our economy we will have to do "all of the above". We will have to develop solar, wind, all the alternative energies that we can, and we will have to drill on American soil, build nuclear power plants, and refineries. And we will have to focus on conservation. It all needs to happen, and the high prices are forcing the issue.

One thing I admire about us Americans is that we don't lay down for trouble long. We are fighters and competitors. T. Boone Pickens has started an advertising campaign for his venture on wind energy and natural gas, and whatever you think about that you have to admire his can do American attitude.

One aspect of American culture that has been a source of strength is our can do attitude, that attitude that we can and will solve our problems. We need to draw on that resource now, and it is great to see that it is starting to come out.

Regardless of what you thought of Ronald Reagan, he had that can do American spirit of hope and gave America strength to meet her challenges. Barack Obama is giving us the same kind of message, and in the chaos I can see America rallying to make a come back over all these issues.

The airwaves are filled with ideas for increasing energy supplies, and although both parties so far appear to be fumbling the ball, the sense that they are about to pick it up and get running with it is there. Out of the chaos, workable ideas will emerge and we will get going again. It's the American way, and I sure wouldn't bet against us.

74 comment(s)

kevin wrote on Jul 10, 2008 9:26 PM:

" Barak Obama a message of hope and strength? We ARE in serious trouble. Lately the man changes his position on issues more often than I change the NVR in the birdcage.

The only proposal he has to deal with high oil prices is to impose windfall profits taxes on the oil companies. That didn't work when it was tried in Jimmy Carter's first term and it won't work in his "second term"... "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 10, 2008 11:11 PM:

" There is no way I can accept an attempt to make Obama compare favorably to Reagan.

RR gave us many great things but you got what you saw with no hidden agendas. However with Obama, for example, you get a gun control guy now pretending to be a big fan of the Second Amendment. Obama is preaching mostly undefined change, except it is the old east coast socialist party line programs we have voted down before. I hate to say it but Chicago is the new socialist East Coast. Must be global warming and New York is under water and Chicago is now East Coast. Time to buy that Greenland farm acreage. We'll have plenty of fertilizer from this election.

Obama is doing the Bill Clinton patented run down the center after the primaries trick, which will be combined with the sharp left turn following the inauguration. He is trying to hide his socialist agenda. Yes in the past I have said that he is a likeable sort of guy but we have to look past that into what he is proposing to do to us. It's not pretty.

Unfortunately Mac is about as likeable as yesterday's pastrami sandwich left outside. When Obama gets his campaign machine at full steam he's going to roll over Mac pretty quickly. Already we see the Clintonista style reality twisting (100 years is such huge lie but has been promoted so well that now it is quoted as fact) combined with a huge advertising budget to tell the lies loud and often.

Barack Obama, I knew Ronald Reagan, and you are no Ronald Reagan. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 11, 2008 12:33 AM:

" I compared them on one point only, and that is that they are giving people hope. Which they both do.

All this stuff about flip flopping is way overrated. Reagan went from being a liberal Democrat to a conservative. Is that a giant flip flop? Or a change of heart based on new information?

Obama has not really been that liberal all along, as I pointed out early on. He is having trouble with some of the black leadership now for not subscribing to their blacks as white victim mentality quite enough.

The conservative reaction to Obama is wildly over hyped, to say the least. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 11, 2008 8:40 AM:

" Point taken on the hope thing, I read more into it than that first time through.

RR's flip was not a flip flop, he only flipped once from true Liberal to Conservative. I would call it a change of heart due to new information. In fact, RR would have made a good libertarian with just a few adjustments.

Obama's record is firmly established as a socialist, not a liberal. What basis is there that he has been anything else? His flipping around now is just what I said, the Bill Clinton run for the middle with the left turn at the end. How do you describe a person who is a member of a gun control group now praising the recent court ruling? That's not only a flip flop, it's a pander to try to trick middle America into voting for him. Unfortunately it will probably succeed.

As far as conservative reaction hype, that's their problem. I'm a libertarian. I have a problem with Obama being a socialist, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. I do not think he will be good for our country at this time, or any time for that matter.

This is going to be an awful election season, with no one out there that I can support. Too bad we can't be the Supreme Court of Voters and send this case back down to the parties to come up with something better. It is really disappointing to think that the country is going to end up with one of these two. A disaster of biblical proportions. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 11, 2008 8:52 AM:

" Obama is in trouble now with some of the black leadership because they thought after 20 years of listening to Wright (he did listen didn't he, or was it like Clinton where he tried it but didn't inhale?) they figured Obama should breathe a little more fire and brimstone on the subject.

Obama knows if he does that, he could lose the election. So there's no credit to him either way on that issue. He either believes what he heard, and he is trying to fool some of the people all of the time - or he doesn't believe what he listened to, and he is trying to fool all of the people all of the time.

Or he just sat there in church and fell asleep. He can't fool anybody with that. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 11, 2008 8:58 AM:

" One last thing (I have to get back to work soon or I will be blogging full time on unemployment).

The kind of hope Obama is offering is a false hope, a kind of utopia that does not and can not exist. Just offering hope is not good enough. The only hope I have is the hope that he isn't going to lead us right down the tubes, or up the river, or wherever we don't want to be. "

kevin wrote on Jul 11, 2008 9:34 AM:

" Mike, you are so far off base on this, it's embarrassing.

President Reagan had a Conservative ideology that he carefully and thoughtfully developed over his lifetime (as you said, after he started out a Liberal Democrat). He promoted this ideology during his Presidency at every opportunity and it was implemented in his policies of lower taxes, stronger National Defense and smaller government. President Reagan had a positive and uplifting vision of America that resounded with citizens of all political Parties. He focused on our commonalities and similarities and the desires for a better future we all have for ourselves and our families.

Obama does not appear to have a governing ideology. Or perhaps more specifically, he has a Liberal ideology that he is carefully hiding from voters. (One could say the same about McCain). His solutions to the issues facing this country are the typical Dem ones of imposing higher taxes, cutting National Defense and creating more restrictions on citizens and businesses. His vacuous rhetoric has no substance and is focused on America’s perceived failures and flaws; that people can’t succeed in today’s economy and they can only survive with the help of the federal government; that our problems are the result of big business and the wealthy; that he is embarrassed of our country; and his wife has never before felt proud of this country. While many people relate to those perceptions and agree, it is divisive and is designed to promote jealousy and rage between the economic classes.

This may be a winning political strategy, that remains to be seen, but it has nothing in common with President Reagan and I cannot comprehend why you insist on making the comparison. "

cab e-girl wrote on Jul 11, 2008 12:16 PM:

" Kevin, reminds me of one of my favorite Winston Churchill quotes, "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain." I must say that the maturation process takes a bit longer in this day and age. "

MarshaMarsha wrote on Jul 11, 2008 12:24 PM:

" Either every single one of you is correct, or all of you are wrong. Which one is it? At least I know enough to insert the phrase "I believe..." before any blogger's post. That way, it looks more like someone is just posting an opinion instead of trying to hammer what they think is correct into everyone else's head.

I believe that no U.S. President in history has run a perfect presidency. They all had issues and problems. They all had decent moments. Just like steak dinners, some were better than others.

Stand up for your beliefs. Vote for whomever you think will do the best job. But arguing in an attempt to get others to believe that your perspective is the correct one is futile, at best. I'm done reading political posts for now, I think I'll go watch the dogs bark at each other through the fence for a while. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 11, 2008 1:39 PM:

" . . . . . MarshaMarshaMarsha . . . . . .

Being right means you don't have to argue. Others should just intuitively understand that you are right and conclude that they only need to bow before your superior judgment and shut up.

Oh wait, that's the socialist viewpoint. The rest of us have to try to hammer what they think is correct into everyone else's head. That includes not shutting up.

However, I agree that dogs barking at each other through the fence do seem more intelligent . . . "

napablogger wrote on Jul 11, 2008 1:54 PM:

" Its funny how you guys have gotten so focused on one line, and appear to be at least slightly misinterpreting it as well.

To me that is an indication of bias against Obama that is so strong that you are not really listening to the guy. To be honest, you seem to be repeating the conservative anti Obama talking points circulating around the media, which are propaganda that most people do not believe. It sure isn't working.

Kevin, I agree with you about Reagan, my point is that you can change your mind and it is not necessarily a flip flop.

In my view Obama is not a flip flopper, and except for die hard Republicans most people see him as hopeful. The criticism that many are making that he is a good speaker and therefore you can't trust him is patently absurd. Who can you trust, a terrible speaker?

Obama is a good speaker because he fills people with hope. Every day that passes and as events unfold I become more convinced that he is legit, and not just a propagandist.

And socialist? Please, that is a propganda term that doesn't mean a whole lot. He is not advocating that the government take over private property, which is what socialism is.

He just wants more taxes than McCain, something I am concerned about but to call him a socialist based on that is absurdly over reaching. It's like calling McCain a dictator because he wants to build up the military or something.

I think he is about like Clinton without the opportunism.

Liberal, yes, but not stupid. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 11, 2008 2:06 PM:

" marshamarsha, never watched the Brady bunch so I don't get the reference, but it sounds like we are giving you a headache.

I have to respectfully disagree with you though about political debate. It does change people's mind and it is not futile.

Being civil certainly helps, on which I have to defend ppf and Kevin, they strongly disagree with me but are most civil and I appreciate that about them.

Using propagandistic terms like socialist or neocon, over time I have found doesn't really work to change people's minds. Being specific about a policy that could be described as socialist or neocon does work better.

I think it is really important for people to seek out opposing views, which most people do not. That is one of the majorly helpful things about these blogs, it forces us to hear the views of the opposing sides. Most people interested in politics only hear their own sides views, like listening to Rush everyday, or living on the Daily Kos or Huffpost site. They get constant confirmation of what they already think.

But you miss a lot when you do that. I was a liberal until in the early 90's I started debating on the net with conservatives, and found that they were right about a lot of things.

I ended up changing parties to Republican because of those discussions and the awareness it brought me.

So I know debate does change people, I know many people who my writing has forced them to reassess some of their views as well.

The key is don't take it personally and listen for the ideas.

All my opinions, what I believe. :) "

jonqcitizen wrote on Jul 11, 2008 2:32 PM:

" Napablogger-

I don't know that I agree with all that you've written, but it is nice to see that you have a positive side as well. "

Bill wrote on Jul 11, 2008 2:51 PM:

" Actually, R.R.'s flop only came about when he realized that some one had to pay for the programs from which he directly benefited. When he became wealthy enough to start paying he realized that income as payment for services was not how to keep his money, rather he had no place to hide his wealth as is the basic problem for the so called vast middle class as did those who could afford to hire his services. The wealthy were and are able to hide income as capital from the tax man. Poor Ronnie couldn't get that far, as many actors don't, so when his acting career went nowhere he settled for being a corporation mouth piece doing his part to become "The Great Communicator." "

kevin wrote on Jul 11, 2008 3:28 PM:

" True, true Bill. The most productive recruiting tool we Conservatives have is that first paycheck kids receive when they start working. They see all the money the government takes and voila, they are OURS.... "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 11, 2008 5:06 PM:

" NB I'm going to have to question your claim to conversion to being a conservative. You sound like you are getting accepting things that a true conservative would not. I know the last few years have been rough for true conservatives, in fact it got me looking around and I found that I preferred libertarianism to the brand of conservatism practiced by the Republicans.

Obama does not fill everyone with hope (neither did Reagan or any other candidate in world history). He does fill me with dread for what he might do before the country wakes up singing 'Back in the USSR'.

As you pointed out, being a good speaker means next to nothing except it can shift a percentage of otherwise uninformed voters. So it becomes important.

I make my own opinions based on what Obama has said and done. I am not spouting propaganda for anyone or any party line. Based on what I have seen so far, I think he has a strong set of socialist beliefs. Seems to me if he believes in socialism, he shouldn't be upset if some people think of him as a socialist.

He is definitely not a liberal.

Bill - I don't know how to reply to you except to say you are 100% wrong about Reagan's change to conservatism. What you said is straight out of the Soros checklist. "

Bill wrote on Jul 11, 2008 5:15 PM:

" True, True Kevin when they realize I've got mine to heck with everybody else they are yours. "

MarshaMarsha wrote on Jul 11, 2008 7:31 PM:

" napablogger: You guys don't give me headaches. Very poor drum and bugle corps give me raging headaches, but I do find you guys entertaining. Sometimes, the dogs barking at each other through the fence are just a little more entertaining. The results tend to be the same: Some bystander screaming "SHUT UP!" I just like to watch.

I believe you changed your mind because you were willing to mature, accept alternative ideas than your own, research that which fascinated you, and change your ideals and beliefs based on the results. I can appreciate that, it was an extremely constructive thing to do. However, I doubt that you simply changed your mind because someone else debated better than you.

I don't label "groups" of people as liberal, conservative, socialist, capitalist, right, left, whatever. I think that every group has ideas that are excellent as well as some that are terrible. The wonderful thing is that 232 years ago the folks in charge had an idea that all of us get to decide who gets a turn at the controls every four years.

The Earth is a round sphere, making it impossible to continue in one direction without eventually arriving someplace you've already been. If the planet were flat and endless we could just wander off and be free to practice whatever we wanted. As it is, somehow we need to find a way to appreciate each other and get along. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 11, 2008 11:02 PM:

" jonq, thanks for your comment. I am glad you read the whole piece and not the one line about Obama.

ppf, true, Obama does scare some people a lot, so it is not all people who he gives hope, but I do think it is the majority. I guess we will see for sure on election day.

I do think that the Republicans have way overinflated their criticisms of him. The thing about Jesse Jackson being angry at him, that is because Obama is saying what conservatives have been saying for years--that black problems are about broken families, absent fathers, personal responsiblity.

I think there is a lot to like there as a conservative, because they can't ignore it when it comes from him. And I think he really means it. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 11, 2008 11:11 PM:

" marshamarsha, all those things are true, about why I changed my mind, but the main thing is that you can't learn anything unless you are exposed to new ideas.

Debating in a forum or on the net is a really good way because it immediately exposes you to people you would otherwise be very unlikely to talk to.

Also, brief debates like this get right to the heart of the matter, rather than having to read a whole book.

And yes, sometimes people did debate better than me, had a better handle on the facts, and I did have to change my mind.

One thing recently for example that someone said on an economics web site I like to read, Economists View, that when under Clinton the top tax rate of income over $250,000 was 4.5% higher than under Bush, and there was really very little economic impact.
People in that salary range don't miss the money much. I realized that was true, although in principle I think that taxes are too high.

It makes me less afraid of Obama raising that tax rate back to what it was under Clinton. The economy did boom then.

We are constantly affected by what we read and hear. Its better to be conscious of that and purposely direct it, I think. "

another voice wrote on Jul 12, 2008 8:00 AM:

" I read the whole piece. Not only does Obama not give me hope, but your thought that China is becoming a huge force for peace is crazy. As pointed out in today's editorial, "China remains the second-biggest villain in this tragic tale, after the murderous Sudanese government. Beijing buys huge quantities of Sudanese oil and has obstructed efforts by the U.N. Security Council to impose tougher sanctions on the goons in Khartoum."
That is just one of many of their consistent actions which are NOT peace promoting. Also, while the US did not participate in the Kyoto treaty, once again we were one of the only countries who actually reduced our carbon emissions by over 3%, while China refuses to make any attempt to participate in protecting the world environment.
Really. China a force for peace. Real humanitarians. uh huh. "

kevin wrote on Jul 12, 2008 9:05 AM:

" NB, did you sleep through the Clinton recession? A lot of people were seriously affected by the economic downturn. We had negative GDP beginning in the third quarter of 2000... "

Todd Adams wrote on Jul 12, 2008 9:42 AM:

" I find the discussion of communism, socialism, and capitalism interesting. I never learned about these systems in school, and often wonder why, but I've come up with my own idea of the differences.

In my mind, these are economic systems used to control the distribution of goods and services in the economy. In communism all goods and services (production, prices, etc ) are controlled entirely by the government. In capitalism, all goods and services are dictated by the market place. In socialism there is a mix with health care, schools, roads, public safety provided by the gov and other services MOSTLY provided by the market.

By my defintion communism and capitalism are the extreme ends of a continuum which rarely exists. Most countries are somewhere between these extremes. France is probably the most quoted example of a socialist country, but we are not that much different. Our government may not do our laundry, but we have social security, medicare, public schools, 40 hr workweek, and many other socialist programs. A socialist in my mind is someone who believes that the gov is best at providing some goods and services and the marketplace is better at providing other goods and services which, by the way, gets to the heart of the debate.

To be a true capitalist, as some describe themselves, then you would have to be opposed to social security, medicare, the right of every person to get an education, worker saftey laws, police, fire, roads, public universities, etc.

In summary, I think the lables communist, socialist, capitalist have a similar effect as the lables liberal, conservative, Repuplican and Democrat, but the world is more complicated than that.

What do you think? "

MarshaMarsha wrote on Jul 12, 2008 10:27 AM:

" napablogger, you have a very valid point that it's difficult to learn anything unless you are exposed to new ideas. I agree entirely.

While I get your point, I find your example confusing... You state that when the tax rate of income over $250,000 was 4.5% higher there was very little economic impact. Three sentences later, you state that the economy was booming then. Sounds like economic impact to me. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Jul 12, 2008 10:50 AM:

" NB - the boom while Clinton was in office had nothing whatsoever to do with anything he did. This was the era of the dot com boom, when people were falling all over themselves to invest in anything to do with the internet. A lot of money was made and lost before people figured out what the internet could do and could not do. In the meantime, there was money flying around all over the place, expensive cars and property selling, etc. Bill had absolutely no role in the cause and effect of the dot com boom, unless you believe that Al Gore invented the internet.

In fact, the dot com boom was going bust during Clinton's last year in office, and people started blaming Bush immediately, even though he also had nothing to do with it.

So let's stop this nonsense about giving Clinton credit for it, OK?

I don't care if the Republicans have overinflated their criticism of Obama. That is not my issue. My point was that he is doing the Bill Clinton fake run for the middle, and in the process changing his message considerably. Obama would not have talked like Bill Cosby three or four months ago. Now I happen to agree with Bill Cosby (and why isn't he running for president?) but early in Obama's campaign, that speech would have been a non-starter.

It should be obvious to anyone with a sense of history that he is only doing this to pander to get middle America votes, without which he needs to win. So he is attempting to trick uninformed voters. It is a valid and fair campaign issue and Obama should expect to be challenged on it. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 12, 2008 12:14 PM:

" another voice, you are missing the point of what I am saying. I am talking about the future, and where we may go.

I do appreciate the fact that you are responding to my main point, however.

On Sudan, I agree but China is dependent on them for oil. You could make the same criticism of the US and Saudi Arabia, that indirectly if not directly supports terrorism. Both of us need the oil, so we soft peddle it.

It is also incorrect that China is making no attempt to protect the world environment. They have a growing environmental movement, and besides that the pollution they are creating is part of the economic boom that is going on. They are building nuclear plants.

The first world countries did the same thing in our development, from a Chinese perspective, why should they force hundreds of millions of their people back into poverty that are finally just emerging because elitist liberals from the United States think they should cut pollution on the US's time frame?

If I were in China I would say to heck with that.

The countries with good pollution controls are the wealthier ones. China is heading there. You cannot expect people in poverty to not want what you have.

What you are missing is all the seeds for a better future that are being planted in China.

When China's economy becomes as large as the US, it will be the same powerhouse economic engine that we are, helping the whole world.

Prosperous people are peaceful people because they have a lot to lose, if nothing else. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 12, 2008 12:21 PM:

" By the way, I have to say that in general I am very suprised by the reaction to this article. Can anyone think in positive terms? Can anyone think of other positive aspects swirling around in today's chaos that could lead in fact to a better future? Are we that mired in negativity and cynicism that all we can see is a bad future?

America has always been a powerhouse of success, and there is no reason to think that that will not continue. China is actually moving in a very positive direction overall, and on balance has been a tremendous help to us, has paid for our debts, has provided inexpensive goods for our working class to make their lives easier, and has done a miraculous job of bringing their own people out of poverty.

Sometimes you have to stop and smell the roses, in times like these it is especially important. What you believe and expect eventually becomes your reality. If you ignore the positive signs for the future it will be that much harder to make it happen. "

kevin wrote on Jul 12, 2008 4:54 PM:

" Amen to that NB. This is a great country and our best times still lie ahead. (If some inexperienced, ignorant politician (Obama) doesn't screw it up first....) "

ADark1 wrote on Jul 12, 2008 8:16 PM:

" Obama HAS polarized the average "THINKING" ( key word here ) American citizen. More then a few I've spoken to on BOTH sides do NOT give the credit to Obama or the Democratic party but to The Republican party.. I know it's gotta make you think! Think about it!

When I was MUCH younger I was probably 100 miles left of Liberal. As I started going the self - employment route, investing , Day trading and Fighting with the IRS..my values and views became more Conservative.

What is GREAT about the Obama candidacy is everyone down to the "little man" is becoming involved. People are debating different viewpoints more then they have in any recent memory. More then a few of us on this blog will claim we've ALWAYS discussed politics. Did we really?

When it comes to the Chinese ( Country NOT persons ) I have found them to be VERY Conservative in their business dealings. When I look at the aspect that deals with MY business as a whole,I refuse to buy hardware and software that I can find in the United States at a higher price.

The reason for this is simple. They actively embed both parts to use it against us. I know sounds paranoid...but true. I am an American FIRST and foremost.

Looking at what I see as the TRUE Conservative mold in business, it is no longer east vs west, Democrat vs Republican, but more of a win at all costs. You would be surprised to learn, hacking American Business and military computers is THE national pastime of the Chinese. It's state sponsored. Think about why.

Obama 08! "

kevin wrote on Jul 12, 2008 9:13 PM:

" Adark1, do a little research about the Clinton and the Chinese. The reality is that Clinton should have been impeached for treason instead of perjury... "

napablogger wrote on Jul 12, 2008 11:09 PM:

" This is off topic, but I have to put this out somewhere.

When the new software gets installed I could just start a new topic myself, but until then...

I just saw tonight that Rasmussen has Obama and McCain tied in the polls. McCain has moved up and they are speculating why.

To me it is obvious why, and I wonder what you all think. Obama's toothless speech on energy policy, and the perception that his approach to gas prices is a non starter. He is going to make things worse, not better, and he better wake up.

Americans are totally p.o.'d about gas prices and I think most of the government and the elitist chattering classes of the media don't get it. It is like the immigration issue, the American people had one view and most of both parties and most of the media ignored it.

The same thing is starting to happen now with gas prices. McCain needs to be a lot more forceful, but even with his faltering, weak kneed (is kneed a word?) policy ideas he is ahead of Obama.

What do you all think? "

ADark1 wrote on Jul 12, 2008 11:17 PM:

" MINE the Borders! "

ADark1 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 3:31 AM:

" I forgot to add..Something that REALLY Ticked me off...A certain Senator caused a run on INDYMAC in an already shaky housing market. It was IMHO INEXCUSABLE! Shamed to say he was also a Democrat from N.Y.I'm sure with friends like you Obama needs no enemies. Between him and Jesse Jackson Sr., I'd say the White House is less attractive everyday.

NOW, we have yet another institution to bail out. Most folks who have a clue about the mortgage banking industry KNEW INDY MAC was barely holding on. Some jerk wanted to score brownie points and hastened its demise. Whether or not they could have limped on is debateable.

What irks me is he had to have KNOWN it would cause a run on the bank! In the morning the INDYMAC will have a NEW Name! Thanks for nothing MORON! Indy MAC CLOSED at 11 cents a share.. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 13, 2008 10:02 AM:

" NB:McCain has a big problem. Americans are really tired of Bush and his policies. In order to win he has to broaden his appeal to independents. The more he sounds like the 3rd Bush term, the less his chance of winning. In order to do that he has to do that he has to distance himself from Mr. Bush. In doing so he may lose the conservative base he also needs.

Obama's problem is that he doesn't have Hillary to contrast with. A big part of his popularity was that he WASN'T Hillary. Now that it's just him, people are asking the hard questions that they should have been asking all along: is he up to the job? What's he going to do? Fair questions.

I wouldn't pay much attention to the polls until either candidate picks a running mate. Then we'll know the whole package.

Your point about the gas prices leads me to another comment you made about the pessimistic comments to your optimistic blog entry. Americans really don't want to hear that the answers to their problems are difficult or complex. They want it all and they want it now.

As you pointed out, gas prices are not going to go down much. Anything the gov't does has consequences. You want the gov't to drop gas taxes, well those taxes pay for something that won't get paid for (road repair, for instance). You want off shore drilling? Get used to seeing oil rigs at the beach and the occasional accidental spill. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 13, 2008 10:19 AM:

" cont-

It's the same with the left. Want out of Iraq, NOW, well Colin Powell's "Pottery Barn" analogy was correct, we broke it, we own it. Want to protect the environment? Are we prepared to pay the economic price? You want social programs? How are they getting paid for? You can't just raise someone ELSE's taxes.

The last presidents to to try to tell the American people that the solutions to our problems would be difficult and require effort were Carter and Ford. Since then we've been fed two messages: The other side is always wrong and you can have anything you want and it won't cost a thing.

Optimism and confidence are good things, but they need to be tempered with reality and the recognition that one doesn't proceed without sacrifice.

I wish it was the case that the candidate that said that would be elected. Unfortunately I think the opposite is the truth. "

Bill wrote on Jul 13, 2008 12:15 PM:

" Adark1, if thats your take on the indymac situation I suggest you look for a career other than investing.

In blogospeak what is IMHO? Can you actually get through a post without unctuous capitalization, arcane acronyms or ellipses. "

ADark1 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 2:12 PM:

" Bill IMHO = In My Humble Opinion. The reasons why Indy Mac went Down are multifold. However Unlike MOST of its predecessors in the "Tanked" markets dealing with mortgage banking industry, Indy Mac was holding its own. Should there have been certain instruments in place to prevent the failure? Well Bill, looking at what you've written in the past, I would think, you'd find that intrusive and inhibiting to fair trade.

Its NOT a simple answer to the meltdown, however..shopuld we start another thread on the meltdown, I'd be morte then happy to oblige you.. with unctuous capitalization, arcane acronyms or ellipses. or not. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 5:22 PM:

" Obama scares the hell out of me. First he is to the far left. Now he is migrating toward the center. Who will he be if elected.

I want to see him giving more speeches without a teleprompter. I want to see his naked speech skills and his ability to articulater his thoughts. Adolph spoke as he of hope and change, then stabbed his country in the heart and murdered millions. Any President that wants to negotiate with terrorists scares me. Whats nest Sharia Law? "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 5:49 PM:

" NB-

The Dems hgave no energy policy. They keep telling us that drilling now won't do anything for 10 years. What about all the capped well in the central valley, L.A., and Orange County? We built the Bay Bridge in three months.

The Dems still want us to buyt foreign oil so they feel better about themselves. I do want wind and solar. Hydrogen is a pipe drewam at best until you can solve the energy to manufactuer problem.

It is as though they are letting us slip into the abyss on purpose. Do the Dems want us to become a third world nation? How come they have not produced ANY significant legislation. BHO and HRC kept telling us what they could do as President, but they do the same as U.S. Senators. The Dems control both houses and nothing. Nothing but gargantuan tax increases. I guess there is more to come. "

Bill wrote on Jul 13, 2008 6:30 PM:

" Adark1, Judging by my past comments you might deduce that I favor fair trade but not that I would find regulation of the financial industry unwanted. Because deregulation became the mantra of the new wave we are faced with a financial crisis of moment proportion world wide.

Because leaders, including evil Bill and Bush, glommed onto the free trade corporate structure we have virtually surrendered our individual rights to global corporate enterprises. It is not even an American Imperialism rather a faceless corporate board that dictates not merely foreign policy but local law.

There are many legal fictions at work chuckling at those who blame the U.N. or CFR for the calamity they are perpetrating. The lack of regulation of INDYMAC has brought it down with its questionable risk taking not any cockeyed senator from New York or any place else.

The lack of regulation helped bring about the financial fiascos of Enron, World Com, Bear Sterns and the California energy crisis which brought Arnold to the governorship. That the president of the United States and not congress should have the ultimate and final say on the trade treaties of the United States is the gravest mistake in modern history with the exception of the invasion of Iraq. George W. Bush is responsible for one and evil Bill for the other.

Individual enterprise in the U.S. has been sacrificed on the altar of corporate ownership and manipulation. We have long ago ceased to be a nation of shopkeepers and forfeited our capitalist and democratic genius to the board room of vast conglomerates that exercise far more power than any political party or economic theory. Notice there is deference in free trade and fair trade.

How’s that for an invective rant. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 7:00 PM:

" Kool-Aid anyone?

Where was the left when bagman Al Gore got $140,000. from the Budist Temple in West Los Angeles for Bill's re-election, a gift for the nuke secrets he gave them. How about the theft of White House furniture? "

ADark1 wrote on Jul 13, 2008 8:12 PM:

" Actually Bill, That's purty good! I happen to agree! I do beg your pardon as I 've seemingly misread some of your prior statements. I shall attempt to do better by you in the future...

Sorry Bill I have to do this....

BTW?, When I said I had my eye on you it was a COMPLIMENT NOT something "ominous" as you'd stated on a previous thread..I may make a "Lib" out of you yet!....Other then that..By all means PLEASE continue that type of undestandable invective rant! Left, Right or even center..truth will NOT be hidden.. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 14, 2008 6:40 PM:

" teacher I more or less agree with your comments. On the comment that Americans want it simple and want somebody else to do it, that is true to some great extent.

Sort of paradoxically, people are also anxious to do something and are willing to work, and work hard, to make things better. I think about the national service idea that Clinton had, and how many young people want to do something like that.

I think that people really care and want things to get better, but are disillusioned by the poor character of our leadership. I think people would even vote for more taxes if they didn't think it was all money down a rat hole of special interests and corrupt giveaways.

This is why I have always emphasized that the key issue is character. If people feel like they are being dealt with honestly and the needs and solutions are explained factually and honestly to them they will totally get on board. "

kevin wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:10 PM:

" Close NB, but no cigar. Character doesn't mean a thing if the person does't have an ideology to guide them. Conversely, if a person has a governing ideology, they can be character deficient and still exhibit leadership... "

napablogger wrote on Jul 14, 2008 11:29 PM:

" A person may have a guiding ideology, and especially if it turns out to be wrong if they have the character to admit that they can change course. If they are trying to win approval from people with the same ideology no matter what happens or how ill conceived their plans, they will stick to them.

I think character trumps ideology, because if people are honest then any problem can be worked out. If people lie, no problem will ever be solved.

Of course, other things matter too, but to me this is the number one priority. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:15 AM:

" There seems to be a theme left out here. While I agree that a moral governing ideology and character are key ingredients to leadership. That leadership is faulty if it contains an agenda requiring scoial change.
With the help of the State, PG&E is forcing us to convert to a new type of light bulb that conatins a small amount of mercury. Not enough to make a big difference you say. Count the lamps and light fixtures in your home, them multiply that figure say 20 million. That is a lot of mercury. The same was true with MTBE. They knew from the begining that is was dangerous especially to the water supply. But, they have their agenda, forced environmentalism.

The State just passed a health care bill that creates a pool for funds to be deposited into for health care. In essence they created a mini-social security fund they can dip into for extra cash. CA is so strapped that we are borrowing from the 09*10 budgets. Not one of the states spending programs are designed to kickstart the economic engine that is California. Putting extra burdens on the people and employers does help, but hinders that economic engine.

As far as Indymac goes, Sen. Chuck "U" Shummer of New York should be credited for its collapse. He was the one who started the rumors of its down fall. His agenda! "

a teacher wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:38 AM:

" "Character doesn't mean a thing if the person does't have an ideology to guide them."

Yep, consider Hitler, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden...

That's where Ideology without character gets you. "

kevin wrote on Jul 15, 2008 9:56 AM:

" Lincoln, FDR, Churchill, Reagan. Leaders can be good or evil. (I don't think Stalin or Saddam really had an ideology, unless you consider mass murder an ideology in and of itself.)

Contrast this with the "leadership" of a Jimmy Carter. Great character, not one whit of leadership ability. That's where Obama will take us... "

a teacher wrote on Jul 15, 2008 11:01 AM:

" "Lincoln, FDR, Churchill"

Seems to me that proves Mike's point as those are men of character.

"Contrast this with the "leadership" of a Jimmy Carter. Great character, not one whit of leadership ability."

Again, Mike's point. Lot's of ideology, not so good in the leadership dept.

As for Obama, I would argue that a leader's job is in part to inspire and he certainly fits the bill. The question is can he deliver. A fair question. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 15, 2008 2:25 PM:

" Integrity is another atribute that must be considered. Is theri word good or is it a "do as I say, not as I do" situation.
As Goebbles stated quite accurately, "If you repeat something often enough, the people will begin to believe it". I believe most of us are the victums of spin\propaganda. Buzz words are substituted for thoughts on actions and deeds. We fall for the buzz words as they sound pretty, neat, and lift our spirits. Presidential candidates promise the world when elected, but are already in position to deliver on what they say they will do.

I do not want BS, I want action. The total combined US Got't does not choose to deliver on what they tell. They all say we need to become less dependent on freign oil, but will not let us drill where we need to drill. They say let us explore other alternative energy sources. Great, let us do that will all haste. But, what will fuel our cars in the mean time? No plan, but to keep sending billions of dollars to those that want us dead.

You have earned your 5% Nancy and Harry. "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 15, 2008 2:30 PM:

" I can't believe how many of you people on here are making more than $220k. I for one am looking forward to my tax credit when/if Obama takes office. "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 15, 2008 2:45 PM:

" BTW, I really liked the attempt to put Reagan onto the end of that list there. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 15, 2008 6:04 PM:

" Hear Ye, you'll note I didn't... "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 15, 2008 10:06 PM:

" Teach-

I definitely picked up on that.

I for one think we should discuss some of the best baseball players ever. The likes of Ruth, Mays, Aaron, Hear Ye, etc. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 16, 2008 1:34 AM:

" Jimmy Carter was one of the most dishonest Presidents ever, right up there with Clinton. A really good book to read about it is Bob Novacks's biography. Before you say that he is a right wing ideologue, read the book. He said the same thing about Barry Goldwater.

Novack wrote all the stuff about Washington politicians in his book that reporters know but never say. Really what he said about Goldwater is that he was all talk and no action. He gave specific examples of what happened, so that is my interpretation.

It is one of the best political biographies I ever read, because Novack is too rough of a personality to be dishonest, you can tell the guy really didn't know how. He even makes himself look pretty bad, but it is a great read.

But Carter is bull on character. He goes to foreign countries and certifies elections based on ideology that everyone else reports has big problems with fraud. How honest is that?

I loved him when he was President because he was the first person to start talking about human rights, which I loved. But he was a phony. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 16, 2008 1:49 AM:

" Character means to me that you have principles and you stick to them, even when it is not convenient. It's old fashioned, unfortunately.

Integrity comes down to being spontaneously honest. You don't have to think how to put it for a week, call a pr guy to get the right wording, etc.

So ideology is perhaps a part of character in that ideology contains principles, principles of what will create success for the most people. Then you have to stick to them yourself.

Which when Al Gore and other Hollywood types use gobs of unnecessary carbon based fuels just becasue they can and want everyone else to stop, that shows a lack of character.

Lying of course shows a lack of principles, and therefore lack of character.

Freeport, when you talk about social change being an aspect of leadership, we are going to have some social change. If we really enforced immigration laws that would be a social change, and in my view a good one.

So I would argue it is not about social change per se, but in the example you gave I think the real problem is the lack of honesty. P, G & E is not telling anyone about the mercury, and giving them a choice about what they want to do. They are lying, and they demonstrate no principles as they are trying to dominate, they are taking people's freedom away which is undemocratic (a principle).

If they were honest and said, here is the deal, and we think it is better to use these other types of bulbs, would you object? I wouldn't because I could then make my own evaluation.

These are all character issues to me. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 16, 2008 8:59 AM:

" You lost me when you mentioned Bob Novak. Talk about lack on integrity. He allowed himself to be used as a conduit to discredit a political opponent with the Valerie Plame Affair. While the other reporters involved at least went the motions of making a court compel them to talk, Mr. Novak apparently couldn't sing fast enough. He's a partisan hack and a coward.

I would also dispute your charge about his election certifications. I would say the opposite, in fact, that he certifies elections and others cry fraud for ideological reasons.

Say what you will about his presidency. It was not a successful one. However, the man has dedicated himself to world peace and the poor people of the world. Having an ideology you don't agree with doesn't mean he's a phony. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 16, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Your point is well taken Mike(NB), but I am referring to forced social change. Societies naturally evolve as they develop. I am not sure enforcing existing laws equals social change. the example I made about the light bulb was not initiated by PG&E, but by Sacramento requiring us to trade light bulbs. They will require the same power generation, but there will now be 400,000,000 mercury laden bulbs to dispose of and pollute our limited water supply. Do I dare say a conspiracy. First, MTBE in our gas (trashed water supplies in the central valley), then the mercury laden light bulbs by the millions (another water contaminating item).

That is the type of social change I am talking about. The politicians know that these bulbs use fewer watts to power, actually do not last as long as they say, and are in fact a hazardous material. MTBE was the exact same thing. While they lie about the specific product, they are lying to force social change. The reason for which is they do not want to generate any more electrical power in California. We will be slowly coerced into further reductions to items in our daily lives. The environment will be cited, lack of water, and natural resources will all be the reasons we will have to give up parts of our lives. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 16, 2008 4:07 PM:

" teacher, no I mean Carter is a liar, a flat out liar, even about little things and things that don't matter. I could go back and look some things up, most people don't seem to know it but he had Bill Clintons' disease. Clinton would even lie about his golf scores when he played with buddies. Some, in particular some high achievers like them, are very dishonest people. I am sure there are some Republicans like that too. "

napablogger wrote on Jul 16, 2008 4:09 PM:

" teacher, you have to read Novack's book before you can say that. Also, he proved that he had nothing to do with any cover up, but no one pays attention to that afterwards I guess. He was smeared by the Democrats, completely. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 16, 2008 5:19 PM:

" NB: So you're saying that Novak did not write a column that revealed Valerie Plame as an employee of the CIA as well as Joseph Wilson's wife(implying that his trip to Africa was a "junket"- to NIGER of all places), that he didn't get that information from "white house officials" and that he fought to keep his sources confidential as reputable news people generally do.

If that is the case, then perhaps he is a reputable News man. Otherwise, I'm afraid he is a partisan hack and I will not take anything he says as anything but shilling for the Administration. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 16, 2008 5:23 PM:

" As for Carter, well, while never met him myself, I lived in Oglethorpe, GA (just up the road from Plains)for a while and I met more than a few who do know him personally. If he is a liar, that's not his reputation among the people who would know. "

kevin wrote on Jul 16, 2008 6:24 PM:

" FYI, Valerie Plames identity was revealed by an employee of the State Department, Richard Armitage. Kilpatrick knew this, which is why it was so idiotic for him charge Libby for the "process" crime of perjury. There was no crime for him to cover up! Thankfully President Bush commuted his sentence, and hopefully he will get a full pardon soon. Remember, the initial allegation was in regards the plot by Plame to send her husband to Niger for partisan political purposes... "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 16, 2008 7:17 PM:

" Someones coming to the defense of Libby?
The guy was found guilty of obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements to federal investigators. The guy dug his own grave. If he had nothing to hide then why did he lie. "

a teacher wrote on Jul 16, 2008 8:24 PM:

" "the plot by Plame to send her husband to Niger for partisan political purposes"

WOW! That is a stretch. Wilson was a Republican. He served Bush Sr (served him well, actually) and voted for Bush jr. Cheney's office wanted someone to check out the yellow cake sale. If Wilson's wife suggested him, why not. He knew the area, the people and had the expertise to evaluate the claim. If he had found the yellow cake, he'd be touted as an excellent choice by the Bush Admin.

PARTISAN PLOT? Please.... "

napablogger wrote on Jul 16, 2008 10:15 PM:

" wow, arguing the Plame case now, are we?

teacher--The point about Novack is that he did not know Plame was undercover or there was any sort of issue around that when he wrote the article.

He wrote all the things you said, but did not do it for the WH.

The Democrats leaped on that and trashed him for it, but it was unfair. He had no idea what he was walking into when he wrote that. I actually don't think Armitate, who was his source, realized what was up either.

This was a Cheney deal all the way, and he is the one who should be criticized for it, he and his assistant that got the jail sentence for lying under oath.

Novack was right to keep his sources confidential, we need a watchdog in the press on government and that is the only way to assure it. "

kevin wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:01 AM:

" Actuallyl, Wilson is a big Lib. He started out a Vietnam protester and never looked back. He donated to Kennedy, Clinton (both) and voted for Algore. He is quoted as saying he "would never vote for a g.d. Republican".

According to the Washington Post, his testimony to Congress actually confirmed that Iraq was meeting with Niger... "

a teacher wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:45 AM:

" Sorry NB, I don't buy it. A credible insider speaks out about rationale being used and suddenly the word is "dropped" at a cocktail party that his wife is a CIA employee. That's no accident.

AND Rove and Libby were pushing that out into the media as "white house spokesman"..

Consider the chain of events Novak claims. Armitage, a State Dept guy, drops the word that Wilson's wife is CIA. How does he know that? Does he know all of the CIA's employees? If it is because he knows about Wilson, since Wilson was an Ambassador, then I would think Armitage would know better than blabbing about the guy's wife to a famous reporter.

Who was Novak's other source? Or did Novak run a story without verification? I think that either Novak knew that he was participating in a hit job and was all to willing to participate.

We'll probably never know the whole story, but as far as I'm concerned Novak is tainted by it. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 3:45 PM:

" NB, A Teacher-

Armitage actually admitted he let Valerie Plames name out. By the way when her name was released she was no longer an employee and not under cover. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 3:50 PM:

" if the topic here is about The World in Chaos, how about Obama's quote from the speech he gave in Denver a couple of months ago.

And no this is not hear-say it is all opver the news and the internet

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

How about the NRA or the 890 million gun owners in America. Maybe he wants a "Brown Shirted, Jack-Booted" style civillian security force.

Is this guy for real? "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 4:22 PM:

" sorry, that is suppose to be 80 million gun owners. "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 22, 2008 8:34 AM:

" Obama wasn't referring to a gun-toting civilian army. Of course, you would have to listen to his entire speech and not just a tasty soundbite to understand this. "

freeport56 wrote on Jul 23, 2008 4:15 PM:

" I think the context of the quote speaks for itself.

Besides, BHO knows it is illegal for our Military to operate within the United States, Posse Comitatus! "

Hear Ye wrote on Jul 24, 2008 9:27 AM:

" freeport56 wrote on Jul 23, 2008 4:15 PM:
" I think the context of the quote speaks for itself. "

Of course you do "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: