[Allan from Fallbrook]

surveyor: I was not trying to credit or blame you for the use of the word “neocon”. Rather, I was making the point that when that word appears in any of the posts on this thread, it is code for “brutal, fascist, imperialist exploitation”. As such, it becomes an automatic dialogue killer. If you are a labeled a neocon, then, as such, any of your opinions are without basis and should be dismissed.

As to the idea that the term “Leftist” or “Left” is benign: I disagree. We may be splitting hairs here, but I find the Left to be an entirely discredited, intellectually and morally bankrupt, infantile holdover from the counterculture movement of the 1960s. From Hillary’s invocations of the Summer of ’68, to those selfsame Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro apologists, I find the Left revisionist and repressive.

The entire Politically Correct movement (which is a product of the Left) is built on the Orwellian notion of controlling language to control culture (as if referring to someone as “physically challenged” somehow alleviates or ameloriates their condition). That is why I become suspicious when someone starts using labels like “neocon” without clearly stating the argument supporting the use of the term. The ad hominem attacks generally follow shortly thereafter. Both methods are straight out of the Red Diaper Baby Handbook.

As to Obama and how he fits into this: I made mention before that I think he is a foreign policy dilettante. He is a newbie on the scene, and cannot and should not be expected to have much experience. However, he is advancing strategies and discussing engagement as though he was a policy wonk along the lines of someone like Joe Biden. While I don’t agree with Biden’s politics, I do respect his acumen and experience when it comes to foreign policy. The problem I have with Obama is the same problem that existed with JFK at the outset of his Presidency: He was no match for someone like Nikita Kruschchev, who used Kennedy’s naivete and inexperience against him ruthlessly.

Forget partisanship and focus on Obama’s voting record and tremendous lack of experience, both domestically and internationally. Being completely objective, and armed with those facts, do we believe that he is the best person for the job, especially in light of those enemies we now face?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

surveyor: I was not trying to credit or blame you for the use of the word “neocon”. Rather, I was making the point that when that word appears in any of the posts on this thread, it is code for “brutal, fascist, imperialist exploitation”. As such, it becomes an automatic dialogue killer. If you are a labeled a neocon, then, as such, any of your opinions are without basis and should be dismissed.

As to the idea that the term “Leftist” or “Left” is benign: I disagree. We may be splitting hairs here, but I find the Left to be an entirely discredited, intellectually and morally bankrupt, infantile holdover from the counterculture movement of the 1960s. From Hillary’s invocations of the Summer of ’68, to those selfsame Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro apologists, I find the Left revisionist and repressive.

The entire Politically Correct movement (which is a product of the Left) is built on the Orwellian notion of controlling language to control culture (as if referring to someone as “physically challenged” somehow alleviates or ameloriates their condition). That is why I become suspicious when someone starts using labels like “neocon” without clearly stating the argument supporting the use of the term. The ad hominem attacks generally follow shortly thereafter. Both methods are straight out of the Red Diaper Baby Handbook.

As to Obama and how he fits into this: I made mention before that I think he is a foreign policy dilettante. He is a newbie on the scene, and cannot and should not be expected to have much experience. However, he is advancing strategies and discussing engagement as though he was a policy wonk along the lines of someone like Joe Biden. While I don’t agree with Biden’s politics, I do respect his acumen and experience when it comes to foreign policy. The problem I have with Obama is the same problem that existed with JFK at the outset of his Presidency: He was no match for someone like Nikita Kruschchev, who used Kennedy’s naivete and inexperience against him ruthlessly.

Forget partisanship and focus on Obama’s voting record and tremendous lack of experience, both domestically and internationally. Being completely objective, and armed with those facts, do we believe that he is the best person for the job, especially in light of those enemies we now face?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

surveyor: I was not trying to credit or blame you for the use of the word “neocon”. Rather, I was making the point that when that word appears in any of the posts on this thread, it is code for “brutal, fascist, imperialist exploitation”. As such, it becomes an automatic dialogue killer. If you are a labeled a neocon, then, as such, any of your opinions are without basis and should be dismissed.

As to the idea that the term “Leftist” or “Left” is benign: I disagree. We may be splitting hairs here, but I find the Left to be an entirely discredited, intellectually and morally bankrupt, infantile holdover from the counterculture movement of the 1960s. From Hillary’s invocations of the Summer of ’68, to those selfsame Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro apologists, I find the Left revisionist and repressive.

The entire Politically Correct movement (which is a product of the Left) is built on the Orwellian notion of controlling language to control culture (as if referring to someone as “physically challenged” somehow alleviates or ameloriates their condition). That is why I become suspicious when someone starts using labels like “neocon” without clearly stating the argument supporting the use of the term. The ad hominem attacks generally follow shortly thereafter. Both methods are straight out of the Red Diaper Baby Handbook.

As to Obama and how he fits into this: I made mention before that I think he is a foreign policy dilettante. He is a newbie on the scene, and cannot and should not be expected to have much experience. However, he is advancing strategies and discussing engagement as though he was a policy wonk along the lines of someone like Joe Biden. While I don’t agree with Biden’s politics, I do respect his acumen and experience when it comes to foreign policy. The problem I have with Obama is the same problem that existed with JFK at the outset of his Presidency: He was no match for someone like Nikita Kruschchev, who used Kennedy’s naivete and inexperience against him ruthlessly.

Forget partisanship and focus on Obama’s voting record and tremendous lack of experience, both domestically and internationally. Being completely objective, and armed with those facts, do we believe that he is the best person for the job, especially in light of those enemies we now face?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

surveyor: I was not trying to credit or blame you for the use of the word “neocon”. Rather, I was making the point that when that word appears in any of the posts on this thread, it is code for “brutal, fascist, imperialist exploitation”. As such, it becomes an automatic dialogue killer. If you are a labeled a neocon, then, as such, any of your opinions are without basis and should be dismissed.

As to the idea that the term “Leftist” or “Left” is benign: I disagree. We may be splitting hairs here, but I find the Left to be an entirely discredited, intellectually and morally bankrupt, infantile holdover from the counterculture movement of the 1960s. From Hillary’s invocations of the Summer of ’68, to those selfsame Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro apologists, I find the Left revisionist and repressive.

The entire Politically Correct movement (which is a product of the Left) is built on the Orwellian notion of controlling language to control culture (as if referring to someone as “physically challenged” somehow alleviates or ameloriates their condition). That is why I become suspicious when someone starts using labels like “neocon” without clearly stating the argument supporting the use of the term. The ad hominem attacks generally follow shortly thereafter. Both methods are straight out of the Red Diaper Baby Handbook.

As to Obama and how he fits into this: I made mention before that I think he is a foreign policy dilettante. He is a newbie on the scene, and cannot and should not be expected to have much experience. However, he is advancing strategies and discussing engagement as though he was a policy wonk along the lines of someone like Joe Biden. While I don’t agree with Biden’s politics, I do respect his acumen and experience when it comes to foreign policy. The problem I have with Obama is the same problem that existed with JFK at the outset of his Presidency: He was no match for someone like Nikita Kruschchev, who used Kennedy’s naivete and inexperience against him ruthlessly.

Forget partisanship and focus on Obama’s voting record and tremendous lack of experience, both domestically and internationally. Being completely objective, and armed with those facts, do we believe that he is the best person for the job, especially in light of those enemies we now face?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

plastic: Aren’t you supposed to hold a sugar cube in a slotted spoon and then drip water over the sugar until it melts?

The French referred to it as the “Green Fairy” for its supposed psychoactive effects (which PadreBrian mentioned).

If you want to really get torched, try some authentic slivovitz or rakia. I had a Croatian friend growing up whose dad used to make homemade rakia (his version used apricots) that ran about 160 proof. Mix it with a little Sprite or 7up and you’re off to the races.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

plastic: Aren’t you supposed to hold a sugar cube in a slotted spoon and then drip water over the sugar until it melts?

The French referred to it as the “Green Fairy” for its supposed psychoactive effects (which PadreBrian mentioned).

If you want to really get torched, try some authentic slivovitz or rakia. I had a Croatian friend growing up whose dad used to make homemade rakia (his version used apricots) that ran about 160 proof. Mix it with a little Sprite or 7up and you’re off to the races.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

plastic: Aren’t you supposed to hold a sugar cube in a slotted spoon and then drip water over the sugar until it melts?

The French referred to it as the “Green Fairy” for its supposed psychoactive effects (which PadreBrian mentioned).

If you want to really get torched, try some authentic slivovitz or rakia. I had a Croatian friend growing up whose dad used to make homemade rakia (his version used apricots) that ran about 160 proof. Mix it with a little Sprite or 7up and you’re off to the races.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

plastic: Aren’t you supposed to hold a sugar cube in a slotted spoon and then drip water over the sugar until it melts?

The French referred to it as the “Green Fairy” for its supposed psychoactive effects (which PadreBrian mentioned).

If you want to really get torched, try some authentic slivovitz or rakia. I had a Croatian friend growing up whose dad used to make homemade rakia (his version used apricots) that ran about 160 proof. Mix it with a little Sprite or 7up and you’re off to the races.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

plastic: Aren’t you supposed to hold a sugar cube in a slotted spoon and then drip water over the sugar until it melts?

The French referred to it as the “Green Fairy” for its supposed psychoactive effects (which PadreBrian mentioned).

If you want to really get torched, try some authentic slivovitz or rakia. I had a Croatian friend growing up whose dad used to make homemade rakia (his version used apricots) that ran about 160 proof. Mix it with a little Sprite or 7up and you’re off to the races.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cooper: While John won’t answer your questions, they are interesting. I’m on the periphery of the oil/gas business (I do seismic and blast engineering for refinery operations), and I’m also somewhat new to the business (coming out of defense biz). I hear a lot about Peak Oil and refineries having to work harder for less output.

Your question #2 caught my eye. Do you have this information? If so, I’d be curious to hear that number, as well as how it was derived. The second part of my question is driven by the fact that different oil companies (i.e. ExxonMobil, RD/S and BP) use different methodologies for the calculation(s), and therefore the variance between their respective numbers can be quite large.

Again, just curious, but it does pick at an interesting thread, especially in light of $5 per gallon gasoline.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cooper: While John won’t answer your questions, they are interesting. I’m on the periphery of the oil/gas business (I do seismic and blast engineering for refinery operations), and I’m also somewhat new to the business (coming out of defense biz). I hear a lot about Peak Oil and refineries having to work harder for less output.

Your question #2 caught my eye. Do you have this information? If so, I’d be curious to hear that number, as well as how it was derived. The second part of my question is driven by the fact that different oil companies (i.e. ExxonMobil, RD/S and BP) use different methodologies for the calculation(s), and therefore the variance between their respective numbers can be quite large.

Again, just curious, but it does pick at an interesting thread, especially in light of $5 per gallon gasoline.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cooper: While John won’t answer your questions, they are interesting. I’m on the periphery of the oil/gas business (I do seismic and blast engineering for refinery operations), and I’m also somewhat new to the business (coming out of defense biz). I hear a lot about Peak Oil and refineries having to work harder for less output.

Your question #2 caught my eye. Do you have this information? If so, I’d be curious to hear that number, as well as how it was derived. The second part of my question is driven by the fact that different oil companies (i.e. ExxonMobil, RD/S and BP) use different methodologies for the calculation(s), and therefore the variance between their respective numbers can be quite large.

Again, just curious, but it does pick at an interesting thread, especially in light of $5 per gallon gasoline.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cooper: While John won’t answer your questions, they are interesting. I’m on the periphery of the oil/gas business (I do seismic and blast engineering for refinery operations), and I’m also somewhat new to the business (coming out of defense biz). I hear a lot about Peak Oil and refineries having to work harder for less output.

Your question #2 caught my eye. Do you have this information? If so, I’d be curious to hear that number, as well as how it was derived. The second part of my question is driven by the fact that different oil companies (i.e. ExxonMobil, RD/S and BP) use different methodologies for the calculation(s), and therefore the variance between their respective numbers can be quite large.

Again, just curious, but it does pick at an interesting thread, especially in light of $5 per gallon gasoline.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cooper: While John won’t answer your questions, they are interesting. I’m on the periphery of the oil/gas business (I do seismic and blast engineering for refinery operations), and I’m also somewhat new to the business (coming out of defense biz). I hear a lot about Peak Oil and refineries having to work harder for less output.

Your question #2 caught my eye. Do you have this information? If so, I’d be curious to hear that number, as well as how it was derived. The second part of my question is driven by the fact that different oil companies (i.e. ExxonMobil, RD/S and BP) use different methodologies for the calculation(s), and therefore the variance between their respective numbers can be quite large.

Again, just curious, but it does pick at an interesting thread, especially in light of $5 per gallon gasoline.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

patb: So if someone doesn’t agree with your particular sentiments on an issue, you want to see them banned?

The OT post on McCain/Obama is running at about 12 pages, and most of it (with some glaring exceptions) is entertaining and informative. Yes, there are some firebrand ideologues on both sides of the issue, but so what? It’s an election year, following what is proving to be a contentious presidency; one would expect emotions to run a little high.

Your mention of Daily Kos didn’t go unnoticed. Kos and HuffPost are famous for shouting down those that don’t agree. One of the things I do intensely dislike about Leftists is their tendency towards repression, especially with anyone deviating from the accepted ideological norm. That is censorship, pure and simple, and it has no place on this site or in this country.

[Author]

Posts