Bringing You The Latest In News Satire and Sarcasm...
Just in case there is any doubt that OPEC is still alive and well maintaining its control over oil production, just take a minute and read the following carefully:
MarketWatch
Last update: 3:09 p.m. EDT Aug. 16, 2008
An Iranian official in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) said Saturday that the producers group is considering leaving oil production levels unchanged or perhaps even trimming them to shore up lagging prices and defend market share.
“The market is oversupplied by at least 1 million barrels a day. If OPEC would like to remove this additional oil out of the market, then OPEC has to cut some production,” OPEC governor Mohammad Ali Khatibi told Dow Jones in a telephone interview.
“There will be maybe two options. One option is maintaining the level of production. It means OPEC will roll over the production. The other option will be some decrease in production,” he added.
The topic will lead OPEC’s agenda when representatives of the group’s 13 member nations gather Sept. 9 in Vienna to discuss production policy.
Oil prices peaked in early July at over $145 a barrel. They have since fallen 22% as the high prices carved deeply into demand, especially in the transport sector. The September crude oil futures contract closed Friday at $113.77 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, a fresh three-month low. See Futures Movers.
Khatibi’s comments come just a day after OPEC said higher prices and weak economic conditions in most industrialized nations are slowing global oil demand.
“Summer strong oil demand growth in China, Middle East and Asia has not been enough to offset the huge decline in OECD oil demand in the second quarter,” the producers group said Friday in its monthly oil report.
The group’s latest estimate trims 2008 demand growth by 30,000 barrels per day — its fifth consecutive month of downward revisions. The group now estimates global oil demand this year will average 86.9 million bpd. It sees demand inching up to 87.8 million bpd next year.
At the same time, the revised forecast sees oil demand from OPEC’s members slipping to 32.1 million bpd, or 100,000 bpd less than in 2007. The 2009 forecast extends the trend, with demand for OPEC oil easing to an average of 31.3 million bpd. The drop is the result of slowing demand growth and oil coming into the market from newly developed fields in non-OPEC nations.
OPEC claims it has bumped up output to help calm the volatile oil market, pumping 32.64 million bpd in July, or 780,000 bpd more than in April. The group’s monthly report also said OPEC is now producing “well above the demand for its crude.” — MarketWatch
The U.S. House and Senate Democrats better start working with the Republicans (who have been working through the recess) and pass that vote to open up our current oil fields and shale deposits to start seeking energy independence from OPEC. OPEC says the world does not need the amount of oil they are producing so they will cut back. Dems don’t you get it? You cannot control the price of oil by simply not using it. Oil used as a basic starting material for virtually everything we consume not just gasoline! The reduced demand just means OPEC will produce LESS to keep the oil price where ever they want it. Too high and they drive the world into recession/ depression. They don’t want that either because consumption will drop. Too low and their profits drop — so they cut back. The point is the WANT CONTROL. That’s their bargaining chip. This maintains their global political control since by shutting off oil flow they can in effect successfully hold the world hostage as world ecomomies fall into recession or worse. Russia has now joined as a major oil producer. They look at us as fools for not developing our energy sources right here at home !! They WILL take advantage of our stupidity.
Pelosi, Obama, Reid and the other back peddlers are just now waking up to these economic facts. Yes, the back-peddling has begun to get themselves closer to the Republican position on oil drilling. Voters need to make their voices heard in November and boot the naive morons and political opportunists out of Congress in November on both sides of the aisle and vote for leaders who will get America to start seriously using our technology to make energy recovery within our country environmentally safe and efficient. They need to do this instead of telling us to check our tire pressure or simply conserve and sacrifice pandering to their far left base.
There is plenty of U.S. recoverable oil to last well into the next millennium and we can make its use more efficient through technology over time. Why should I believe this? America can put a man on the moon, unleashed the energy stored in matter both confined and unconfined, so there should be no doubt that we have the scientific capabilities to achieve this. At least use the current state of the art drilling techniques and recovery technology being used in other countries to help make us less reliant on oil from countries that hate us. We should do this while we develop the other new petroleum sources like shale oil recovery. In fact just recovering oil from wells that we have already drilled with these modern new technologies would be a big start in the right direction!! Just get these self serving politicians out of the way and stop handcuffing our right to become energy independent. It may just become a matter of national security sooner rather than later.
Then there is this excerpt from the Washington Post to consider:
Here’s a dispatch from the Aug. 13 edition of the Financial Times: “OPEC pushed its oil production to the highest level in its 48-year history last month, even as demand was slipping in the United States and Europe, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said yesterday.”
That dramatic increase in OPEC oil production, adding about 300,000 barrels daily to the world market — an estimated 200,000 barrels a day less than what industry experts think OPEC can produce — has helped to reduce the per-barrel price of oil by 24 percent over the past month, bringing it down to about $115 a barrel from a July high of $147.27.
Gasoline pump prices have fallen in turn, dropping below $4 a gallon for regular unleaded for the first time this summer. Oil industry experts are predicting that those prices will fall to at least $3.65 a gallon by summer’s end.
The financial markets and consumers are all giddy over that news, like junkies who have just been given a free fix. They need to get control of themselves. They are being suckered, snookered worse than a pitiful street-corner addict.
OPEC is engaging in addiction marketing. It is doing now what it has done before whenever its biggest customers start getting serious about reform. It has increased production, lowered the price and made its drug of choice more accessible — all in a bid to keep its high-paying customers hooked.
OPEC knows what the drug dealers know: Addiction is so much more attractive than the hard and often painful work of cleaning up one’s act. Affordable addiction is even more attractive. It dulls the senses and corrupts the will to change, to travel a different and ultimately more nationally secure route.
The questions are: Will we fall for OPEC’s latest fix? Will we abandon the path toward energy conservation and a more energy-secure nation? Will we sell our nation and our souls for another OPEC high?
Loading ...
[
+2 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
Sounds like the Clintons will try their best to hijack the Denver Convention. We wish them well. It’s been almost 40 years since we have all seen a good convention demonstration.
All ye 50+ year old hippies who missed the last big one ( the Democrat National Convention in Chicago 1968 ) here’s your chance to make up for it in Denver in 2008! Come re-live your youth and bring back some of those good old “fighting in the streets” and “power to the people” memories.
The Clintons are not giving up just yet:
As Democrats near the Aug. 25 start date of their party convention, Sen. Hillary Clinton acknowledged in her chat that “excitement and curiosity is certainly starting to build” but that “no decisions have been made yet.” (regarding a roll count vote on the Convention floor.)
Clinton said, “I will make sure that we keep you up to date and involved with all of the convention activity.”
Flying from Minneapolis to Chicago, Obama described working with Clinton’s staff as “seamless”.
Asked whether or not entering Clinton’s name into nomination would heal party rifts, Obama said, “I don’t think we’re looking for catharsis. I think what we’re looking for is energy and excitement about the prospects of changing this country.”
Obama provided no further detail on Clinton’s convention activities, stating only that “it is getting worked out by our staffs” and stressing their shared enthusiasm “for a unified party”.
A Convention Nomination?
Asked whether or not her name would be placed into nomination at the convention, Clinton did not rule out the possibility and said, “Senator Obama and I share the goal of ensuring that the voices of everyone who participated in this historic process are respected.”
Clinton’s Thursday Web chat follows remarks she made to a gathering of supporters last week during which the New York senator said she’s looking for a “strategy” for her delegates to have their voices heard and “respected” at the Democratic National Convention. — ABC News
There is no love lost between Hillary, Bill and Obama. Especially bitter is Bill Clinton who is reported as still fuming about Obama’s claims that he was playing a race card during the campaign. Also rumored is that a special holding area has been set up outside of Denver for the possible arrests of demonstrators in the event the scene downtown gets ugly. The DNC will do everything it can to prevent creating such a negative media event just weeks before the election. ( Sounds a bit like protesting in downtown Beijing doesn’t it? )
[
+2 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
This may be one of the best pieces of satire for the week from the pen of Scott Ott…
(NEW YORK) — In a double-trade designed to end bitter recriminations, and “to let bygones be bygones”, retired Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre has been traded to the New York Jets, and in return, New York will send defeated presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to the Republican Party.
Neither superstar has dealt well with being “out of the game”, and both have been looking for ways to extended their involvement.
Sen. Clinton’s people had been in negotiations with victorious rival Barack Obama to get a prominent role in the Democrat Party’s convention in August, while the Packers had offered Mr. Favre a “marketing contract” worth some $20 million which would have sidelined him as well.
But these seasoned competitors yearned to get back in the fray — to step out under the lights, to hear the cheer of the crowd, to smell the rich aroma of human blood and sweat and to savor the look of fear in an opponents eyes because you’re about to do something he doesn’t expect.
The Jets ended the 2007 season with a disappointing 4-12 record, and the GOP has stumbled to a 233-202 minority in the House, and 51-49 in the Senate. Each beleaguered franchise hopes the acquisition of a storied veteran will breath new life into the organization, yet spokesmen from both acknowledge that getting a grizzled warrior to adopt a new game-plan poses the proverbial challenge of “teaching an old dog new tricks”. — as reported by satirist Scott Ott / ScrappleFace
The Democrat convention should prove to be an interesting spectacle when Hillary takes the stage as is currently planned. One has to wonder if she will be wearing her usual botox smile or will she resemble the photograph above? Battered and beaten to a pulp. What made her so distasteful to the democrat voters who yet still seem to adore her husband?
[
+2 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
So here’s an idea that we would like to suggest to John McCain to ponder. Maybe put in his speeches as a specific action for the American people to consider in November as opposed to the nebulous solutions that Obama offers. Couple the Democrat stance on us driving less and reducing consumption and being opposed to ALSO drilling and refining to increasing oil and gasoline capacity AND their simultaneous dislike of the concept of a Guantanamo Bay camp on the island of Cuba, it occurred to us that we might have an opportunity here.
Since Gitmo, as we understand it is a Federal, and not State, controlled territory why not develop the area for a DUAL purpose? Begin the appropriation of funds to initiate construction of a MAJOR oil to gasoline refinery at Quantanomo Bay. Perhaps build one of the largest in the world putting those in the Middle East to shame!
Advantages:
1. Closely located to the Gulf States to reduce transportation costs.
2. It provides a stronger reason for maintaining a security force there and places pressure on Venezuela and Cuba to stay well behaved. Who knows with time it might be an asset that helps democratize Cuba.
3. Protect the assets with the strong military presence already there.
4. Work out deal with China who are already planning to drill off the coast of Cuba and restore an old Russian refinery on the island. (Get in there before they decide to turn Cuba into the next Kuwait)
5. You have a labor pool as well. Put the low risk detainees to work !!
Maybe this sounds too simple, but why not think out of the box and put this land to even better use than it provides today? We do CONTROL that territory don’t we? Why not exploit it? Why not also drill off it’s coastline???
Something to consider anyway…. just thought we would put it out there in case someone running for President with some balls might consider it to help with the issue that we have not built a gasoline refinery in our country for decades, 25 years to be exact!! Here is a low risk place to start! Who would object there that votes in our elections ?? (Unless you consider illegal aliens from Cuba voting illegally for Obama - lol)
[
+1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
Well we do have to admit that the New Yorker has out done itself here. Take special note of the American flag burning in the fireplace in presumably the Oval Office of the White House. The fist pump of victory, and the bisected Osama Bin Laden portrait on the wall. Yes folks this is satire and the New Yorker is getting its share of heat over it.
Barack and Michelle as you can imagine are not too happy. (And you thought it was only radical Muslims that did not like political cartoons). A note to both the Obamas on behalf of all satirists including the New Yorker: If you can’t take the heat then get out of the kitchen. This heat comes with the territory and please don’t call this racist! The cover might be considered by some as being over the top (i.e. the burning flag and the Bin Laden portrait) but hey, the apple does not fall that far from the tree with respect to the underlying symbolic suggestion and psychology of this cartoon given the past life experiance of these two. You can’t change history folks. Michelle did sympathize with the leftist, Marxist radical Black Panther movement in college. Just read some of her racially biased writtings at Princeton. Barack did have an Islamic upbringing as a child even though he claims to now be a Christian. (At least a Christian in the Rev. Wright sense of the word).
Hey folks, to those of you who have their panties in a bunch over this. What ever happened to artistic freedom and the 1st Amendment?? Isn’t that one of the mantras that the liberal left and ACLU always claims to be near and dear to their hearts? You know, freedom of expression and artistic license? Or do we have a double standard at play here when the shoe is on the other foot? LOL — the American media, you gotta love it.
Bravo New Yorker for having the guts to go with this front cover! Let’s keep free speech and the 1st Amendment alive and well.
[
+5 rating,
5 votes]
Loading ...
Let us know which one resonates with you…
[
+5 rating,
5 votes]
Loading ...
(Illinois) — Democrat presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama today faulted the “weakness of the Bush administration” for Iran’s recent long-range missile testing, and said when he sits in the Oval Office “Iran will know that we mean talk.”
The Illinois senator said he would engage Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in face-to-face negotiations offering “carrots as well as sticks,” meaning that he would “reward Iranian goodwill gestures with stirring laudatory speeches, and punish Iran’s violations of U.N. resolutions with bold rhetorical rebukes.”
“We know that President Ahmadinejad wants to see Israel wiped off the face of the map,” said Sen. Obama, “Of course, the first step in negotiating is to determine what the other party wants that you might be able to provide”
“Iran needs to know that our words mean something,” he said. “During the Obama administration, our words will mean that we are saying things by combining those words into sentences to express ideas about how we feel, using dramatic phrases and dynamic cadences. Iran must never question our resolve to deliver…speeches.”
While the Bush administration has tried to get allies to unite in applying pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear program, Sen. Obama said he would bring change to American foreign policy by trying to get U.S. allies to unite in applying pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear program.
“It’s a lot different than the Bush approach,” he said, “because in my strategy, there is no Bush.” — as reported by satirist Scott Ott / Scrappleface
To all the Democrats out there: Barack sure sounds more and more like Bush every day. A Bush 3rd term without the Bush (and without the balls if Jesse Jackson has his way).
McCain at least has been true to his centrist leanings before, during and we are sure after the nomination. Barack on the other hand has bamboozled all of you — Jessie Jackson, “the castrationist,” knows it all too well — that’s why he wants to cut off his balls!
Also perhaps a bit of jealousy lingers since Obama has stolen the good preacher’s black political spotlight of many years. And as for Reverend Al? Well we suspect he is simply lying low until after the election just to make sure he doesn’t “step in it” too. However… if Barack keeps up his back peddling, the good reverend just might give brother Jessie a call, as well as his two good friends Hillary and Bill, and put on a real show for all of us in Denver !
[
+1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
Feeling the heat from the left closing in, and sweat accumulating under his collar, Obama reassures his constituency in St. Louis on Saturday Jul 5th that he still plans on his surrender and withdrawal of troops as he announced to the enemy earlier this year… Al-Qaeda you don’t have to change your victory celebration timetable as long as he makes it to the White House. His eye is winking at his core following. The entire city of San Francisco was heard to breath a collective sigh of relief - wink wink.
ST. LOUIS (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Saturday his plan to end the Iraq war was unchanged and he was puzzled by the sharp reaction to his statement this week that he might “refine” his timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops.
“For me to say that I’m going to refine my policies I don’t think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn’t change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I’m going to end it as president,” Obama told reporters on his campaign plane. — Reuters
So here is a guy who has exploited the radical left since his college days in his bid for the highest office. What’s the first thing he does after his nomination is locked up? Pander to the right and middle of the road voter in rural America. Does anyone see anything different about this guy then any of his predecessors? To make matters worse he acts dumbfounded as to why the left is furious over his recent remarks.
Hey Obama… We have a news bulletin for you. You are now beholding to the radical left and Moveon.Org unlike your rival Hillary Clinton. Now you need to reassure the left that you have not flipped, but you must at the same time flip for those in the middle. This is what happens when a campaign is only built on rhetoric and double speak. Where is the change your are bringing to the political process Oh Ye Messiah Obama? Do you really expect mainstream America not to see through your ‘I will say anything to get elected’ charade while you pander to the middle of the road voters with both eyes on the polls? How far to the right, and hypocritical are you willing to become to capture that middle vote? Have you no shame?
And here is the clincher… radical leftists - read it and weep. You have been bamboozled:
Obama said his willingness to consider changing conditions on the ground and the potential ramifications of the pull-out plan was a strength — and a sharp contrast to Republican President George W. Bush’s stay-the-course strategy in Iraq.
“The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal — those are things that are all based on facts and conditions,” he said.
“I’m not somebody who, like George Bush, is willing to ignore facts on the basis of my preconceived notions. I want to pay attention to what is happening on the ground.”
Under heavy pressure from McCain, who criticized his failure to visit Iraq since 2006, Obama plans to travel to Iraq and Afghanistan. The dates have not been announced for security reasons but the trip is expected within the next month. — Reuters
[
0 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
Well surprise, surprise, and if this don’t beat all! This news story sure sounds a lot like a set up for a future statement from Obama that might go something like “..after reconsidering the information on the ground from our commanders…” brace yourself “… we must ensure that the fragile peace is preserved, and I have determined after careful consideration that premature withdrawal of American troops would in fact be counter productive.” You can take that to the bank as Obama begins his flip toward the middle ground and the moderate voters he has been courting of late (including evangelicals).
It wasn’t that long ago that Obama, and the henchmen of Moveon.Org, and other far left anti-war factions were out to crucify General Petraus and his assessment of the “surge” working. Interesting how CHANGE AGENT OBAMA is about to CHANGE his position on troop withdrawal since he has locked up the nomination. One has to wonder if Hillary has enough energy and guts to rally the left and perhaps pull a last minute upset at the convention if this story is going where we think its going. An upset driven by a strong voice from the left might make for some interesting photo-ops in Denver!
Senator Barack Obama said Thursday that he might “refine” his plans for a phased withdrawal from Iraq after meeting with military commanders there later this summer. But later, he hastily held a second news conference: to emphasize his commitment to withdrawing all combat troops from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.
His two statements, made just hours apart in Fargo, N.D., reflected how the changing dynamics on the ground in Iraq have posed a challenge to Mr. Obama, as he tried to retain flexibility as violence declines there without abandoning one of the central promises of his campaign: that if elected he would end the war there.
His remarks came as Republicans — including his all-but-certain Republican rival, Senator John McCain — have been arguing that Mr. Obama would likely change his position on the phased withdrawal. They argue that with violence dropping there, bringing the troops home would risk erasing the fragile gains that have been made.
Mr. Obama said at his first news conference that he planned a “thorough assessment” of his Iraq policy when he visits the country later this summer. “I’ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability,” he said. “That assessment has not changed. And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”
Mr. Obama has long spoken of consulting with commanders in the field as part of his plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, but his shift in emphasis in the way he spoke about the situation on Thursday — after weeks in which Republicans and even an outside Iraq policy adviser to the Obama campaign argued against a withdrawal along the lines he had proposed — fueled speculation that he might not be wedded to his timetable. — NYT
And then there is this…
We’re beginning to understand why Barack Obama keeps protesting so vigorously against the prospect of “George Bush’s third term.” Maybe he’s worried that someone will notice that he’s the candidate who’s running for it.
Most Presidential candidates adapt their message after they win their party nomination, but Mr. Obama isn’t merely “running to the center.” He’s fleeing from many of his primary positions so markedly and so rapidly that he’s embracing a sizable chunk of President Bush’s policy. Who would have thought that a Democrat would rehabilitate the much-maligned Bush agenda?
Take the surveillance of foreign terrorists. Last October, while running with the Democratic pack, the Illinois Senator vowed to “support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies” that assisted in such eavesdropping after 9/11. As recently as February, still running as the liberal favorite against Hillary Clinton, he was one of 29 Democrats who voted against allowing a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee reform of surveillance rules even to come to the floor.
Two weeks ago, however, the House passed a bill that is essentially the same as that Senate version, and Mr. Obama now says he supports it. Apparently legal immunity for the telcos is vital for U.S. national security, just as Mr. Bush has claimed. Apparently, too, the legislation isn’t an attempt by Dick Cheney to gut the Constitution. Perhaps it is dawning on Mr. Obama that, if he does become President, he’ll be responsible for preventing any new terrorist attack. So now he’s happy to throw the New York Times under the bus. — WSJ
[
+2 rating,
2 votes]
Loading ...
Monday - Jun 30th, 2008
8:40 pm
Politics
(INDEPENDENCE, Missouri) (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama rejected questions about his patriotism on Monday even as he drew fire for a supporter’s attack on Republican rival John McCain’s military record.
Obama kicked off the week leading up to the July 4 Independence Day celebration with a broad-ranging speech extolling American virtues. He said questions about patriotism were a poisonous remnant of the 1960s culture wars.
The Illinois senator also took another step to heal party divisions, speaking to former President Bill Clinton for about 20 minutes by telephone from Kansas City just days after campaigning for the first time with defeated rival Hillary Clinton, the former first lady.
The former president raised questions last week about how committed he was to Obama’s success when he delivered a speech to the U.S. Conference of Mayors and barely mentioned the Democratic presidential contender.
The Obama campaign described Monday’s conversation as terrific and said the Illinois senator asked Clinton to campaign for him, which the former president appeared excited to do.
“He has always believed that Bill Clinton is one of this nation’s great leaders and most brilliant minds, and looks forward to seeing him on the campaign trail and receiving his counsel in the months to come,” Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.
Obama better hope that Bill Clinton is more successful in promoting Obama then he was in promoting Hillary for the nomination!! One more judgment error??
[
+1 rating,
1 votes]
Loading ...
