Archive → August, 2008
McCain flirting with pro-choice Veep
Republican presumptive presidential nominee John McCain is floating the idea that he may pick a pro-choice Republican or even a Democrat as his running mate in his bid for the White House. Either choice would be the final slap in the face to the party’s conservative wing, and might well trigger a conservative revolt within the GOP, including a possible challenge on the convention floor. Such a move would be like weight loss pills in a voter and support sense of the word.
In spite of conventional wisdom, this is a very winnable year for the GOP, if they focus on energy policy and its linchpin role in affecting the economy. Not only could the party retain the White House, but if energy policy and the economy are the top focal issues, with foreign policy a strong third issue, the GOP could not only stave off predicted seat losses in the House and Senate, but potentially even post gains in both houses.
The key, however, is whether the party has learned that its losses of two years ago were caused by abandoning the GOP’s conservative core values, not by being too conservative.
Time will tell the tale on this one.
Gov. T-Paw appears on Face the Nation
Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty appeared yesterday on CBS’ Face the Nation and stumped in favor of Sen. John McCain’s foreign policy experience, as Pawlenty continues to preen and pose for the position of McCain’s number two.
“One of the questions this crisis raises is: Who do you want sitting across the table from Vladimir Putin and people like him, John McCain or Sen. Obama? I think the answer is Sen. McCain, and that’s for obvious reasons, whether its his experience in national security, military affairs, his clarity, his strength and his judgment in these matters,” Gov. T-Paw said.
Let’s hope our big government RINO Republican governor can stop and smell the roses while sporting such a brown nose before he runs out of acne cream.
FCC warns “fairness doctrine” could spread to Web
FCC commissioner Robert McDowell warned that a return of the so-called “fairness doctrine” could see the long-dead law revised for the age of blogs, and extend government censorship to blogs and other Web sites. Jeff Poor, writing for BusinessAndMedia.org, wrote this:
The commissioner … told the Business & Media Institute the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned. McDowell, who was against reprimanding Comcast, said the net neutrality effort could win the support of “a few isolated conservatives” who may not fully realize the long-term effects of government regulation.
“I think the fear is that somehow large corporations will censor their content, their points of view, right,” McDowell said. “I think the bigger concern for them should be if you have government dictating content policy, which by the way would have a big First Amendment problem.”
“Then, whoever is in charge of government is going to determine what is fair, under a so-called ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ which won’t be called that – it’ll be called something else,” McDowell said. “So, will Web sites, will bloggers have to give equal time or equal space on their Web site to opposing views rather than letting the marketplace of ideas determine that?”
This ought to be considered scary stuff, folks, whether you’re liberal or conservative. Time for some budgeting and planning to get out the vote and support candidate who don’t support government censorship of new media!
Oil continues to ease back down
After months of pressure at the pump, the cost of oil continues to ease, thanks to lower demand – especially in the US – despite concerns like the fresh conflict between Russian and European Georgia. prices are down around $115.20 per gallon and seem to still be headed downward in early trading.
While many analysts are mystified by oil’s drop, the truth is that several months of unrelenting price increases had perched oil at an unmaintainable high benchmark, and all this is, really, is a market correction in the price.
Given the actual market dynamics, oil should be somewhere around $70-$80 per barrel; so although it may take a while, it would not be surprising to see oil continue to fall another $35-$45 per barrel before leveling off, though it may take three or four months to get there.
Right in time for the US elections? No, I doubt this is a big oil conspiracy; it’s more like a colon cleanse for an over-inflated market and where prices go after the US election will still depend more on market dynamics than election results.
Of course, an Obama victory would mean that any easing of prices at the pump could be replaced by a higher federal fuel tax – so watch out.
