jerome t. scuggs' weekly politix thread

[Jerome Scuggs]

yeah the supreme court really screwed up on the 2nd amendment issue, I agree with Jerome.

The environment is more important.

what really pisses me off more than anything is how Scalia suddenly decides the constitution is important. if there's one thing i hate more than a libertarian or fascist, it's people who are inconsistently both. upholding the 2nd amendment as you simultaneously destroy the 4th ain't fooling nobody!

edit: and yes, i will be very interested in seeing how the lifted gun ban goes down. i wonder if Montana had anything to do with the decision...

the same applies to the environment. apparently it was easy as hell to be all environmentalist when it was affordable, but now not only are we demanding the oil companies drill offshore, but some politicians (I won't say "the democrats" because it's only a few of the more radical ones) now want to nationalize oil to speed up this very un-environmental move.

either/or, government, there is no in-between.

[Epinephrine]

yeah the supreme court really screwed up on the 2nd amendment issue, I agree with Jerome.

The environment is more important.

[milosh]

n b4 falk's first name is pamela

[Pearl Jam]

instead of posting a new thread every time our government does something stupid this week, i will post it in this thread

the supreme court recently decided in favor of the second amendment, and Louisiana is no longer allowed to kill child rapists on death row.

personally i am keeping an eye on the oil "crisis". democrats want to nationalize oil, which i find interesting (this is why).

the question on my mind is: the government has been passing all sorts of laws in order to curb the use of oil, and now that people have ACTUALLY lowered their demand (30 billion less miles traveled in the past few months alone - once again, economics doing something the government couldn't), Congress is now looking for ways to make oil cheap.

anyone have any opinions? what's more important, cheap oil or the environment? can the two exist together? is there a solution?

i've been watching alot of C-SPAN, and the general consensus of every politician is "let's pay someone to develop a magic engine that doesn't use oil and emits water and food for the needy". since it's becoming bleedingly obvious that throwing money at a problem does NOT guarantee results, alot of politicians are also calling for expanded offshore drilling. but, once again, the politicians are being far too idealist - because for one, it's not physically possible: the industry that builds oil rigs is booked solid for the next five straight years.

now that congress can't act, they've got to pretend like they are not to blame. who should we blame? the new buzzword is "speculators". here's a fantastic article about speculation and uncertainty that makes a solid case - namely, how the insane amounts of speculation is the result of government market distortion.

i think honda has already developed some sort of engine that emits water vapor, but i've done little to no research on it so i'm not exactly sure if that's 100% accurate

along the lines of oil would be this tasty nugget: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...r=HOME_4181473

thank you, o' gracious and benevolent saudis! or maybe, just MAYBE they're upping production because of what you mentioned - 30 billion less miles traveled, people flocking to dealerships to buy tiny/hybrid cars with better gas economy and people tightening their belts when it comes to gas usage.

[Jerome Scuggs]

instead of posting a new thread every time our government does something stupid this week, i will post it in this thread

the supreme court recently decided in favor of the second amendment, and Louisiana is no longer allowed to kill child rapists on death row.

personally i am keeping an eye on the oil "crisis". democrats want to nationalize oil, which i find interesting (this is why).

the question on my mind is: the government has been passing all sorts of laws in order to curb the use of oil, and now that people have ACTUALLY lowered their demand (30 billion less miles traveled in the past few months alone - once again, economics doing something the government couldn't), Congress is now looking for ways to make oil cheap.

anyone have any opinions? what's more important, cheap oil or the environment? can the two exist together? is there a solution?

i've been watching alot of C-SPAN, and the general consensus of every politician is "let's pay someone to develop a magic engine that doesn't use oil and emits water and food for the needy". since it's becoming bleedingly obvious that throwing money at a problem does NOT guarantee results, alot of politicians are also calling for expanded offshore drilling. but, once again, the politicians are being far too idealist - because for one, it's not physically possible: the industry that builds oil rigs is booked solid for the next five straight years.

now that congress can't act, they've got to pretend like they are not to blame. who should we blame? the new buzzword is "speculators". here's a fantastic article about speculation and uncertainty that makes a solid case - namely, how the insane amounts of speculation is the result of government market distortion.