Just a reminder...

[GMan 3,569]

[deuceswild 15]

I wish Obama would lower the price of Doritos and Old Spice deodorant as well.

[GMan 3,569]

But there are plenty of things he could do on the home front that would help alleviate our dependency on foreign oil...but he's against anything that would help America prosper...

[deuceswild 15]

I realize I'm in the minority on this site when it comes to politics, I can accept that. I don't kick and scream, whine, or call foul when Obama is criticized fairly or even unfairly. While the liberal view makes more sense to me, I'm open to saying that conservatives have it right a fair amount of the time and wrong just as much. I know losing the '08 election wasn't a good time for conservatives, Obama isn't your man, he's too radical this, too crazy that, on and on. I lived with Bush for 8 years, I know what it's like to be on the other end. I wanted America to succeed and Bush to choke, and that almost happened. But then I grew up during the second term, decided I'm stuck with it. I stopped being bitter about it, realized we're all in this together, I might as well support what we have. Cut him slack for any shortcomings of the first term with hopes it would all be okay.

 

I have criticized Mr. Obama as well. I think on the forefront of my mind is Keystone. While I understand that he wants us to progress from our oil dependency, become more green, and he wants an America built to last... we need jobs, we need to build something NOW, and we'll be depending on oil at some rate for the next hundred years or more... so yeah, WTF Obama... I just have a hard time understanding how someone can say an American president, be it Bush or Obama, has some anti-American agenda.

 

It's inconceivable to think you can change anyone's mind about politics. In my mind, there is no such thing as a moderate. If someone claims they're a moderate, then they're just not comfortable telling you which way they lean. But I believe there is a thing called being reasonable, and I find anything said about a president being un-American, being anti-prosperity, or being Muslim is being unreasonable. He's not the best president and he's not a president at the best time, but reasonably... I don't think it's been as bad as FoxNews thinks. If Bush got a D- in my book, I'd give Obama a solid C. A little bit of progress and not a lot of change. Is that unreasonable?

Edited March 15, 2012 by deuceswild

[legend11 32]

I realize I'm in the minority on this site when it comes to politics, I can accept that. I don't kick and scream, whine, or call foul when Obama is criticized fairly or even unfairly. While the liberal view makes more sense to me, I'm open to saying that conservatives have it right a fair amount of the time and wrong just as much. I know losing the '08 election wasn't a good time for conservatives, Obama isn't your man, he's too radical this, too crazy that, on and on. I lived with Bush for 8 years, I know what it's like to be on the other end. I wanted America to succeed and Bush to choke, and that almost happened. But then I grew up during the second term, decided I'm stuck with it. I stopped being bitter about it, realized we're all in this together, I might as well support what we have. Cut him slack for any shortcomings of the first term with hopes it would all be okay.

 

I have criticized Mr. Obama as well. I think on the forefront of my mind is Keystone. While I understand that he wants us to progress from our oil dependency, become more green, and he wants an America built to last... we need jobs, we need to build something NOW, and we'll be depending on oil at some rate for the next hundred years... so yeah, WTF Obama... I just have a hard time understanding how someone can say an American president, be it Bush or Obama, has some anti-American agenda.

 

It's inconceivable to think you can change anyone's mind about politics. In my mind, there is no such thing as a moderate. If someone claims their moderate, then they're just not comfortable telling you which way they lean. But I believe there is a thing called being reasonable, and I find anything said about a president being un-American, being anti-prosperity, or being Muslim is being unreasonable. He's not the best president and he's not a president at the best time, but reasonably... I don't think it's been as bad as FoxNews thinks. If Bush got a D- in my book, I'd give Obama a solid C. A little bit of progress and not a lot of change. Is that unreasonable?

Bravo, Deuces! Very good post. While I (slightly) disagree on you with your opinion of moderates, I am right with you on the statements I put in bold above.

 

Also, good to have your three paragraph, let-'em-have-it posts back. Haven't seen one of these in a while.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I wish Obama would lower the price of Doritos and Old Spice deodorant as well.

 

Doritos.

Old Spice.

Oil.

 

Tell me which one of the three is a traded commodity.

[Hacker 82]

Doritos.

Old Spice.

Oil.

 

Tell me which one of the three is a traded commodity.

 

Which one is a highly in demand, speculative, traded commodity?

[Deleted Account 5,203]

Which one is a highly in demand, speculative, traded commodity?

 

Doritos, duh. ;)

 

My point is that commodities, much like stocks, are not completely immune from political pressure. Hence, why the comparison to Doritos is a bad one. I don't understand why many on the left believe that oil prices are driven completely by market forces. It's so obvious. The only way one could miss seeing it is if one is completely oblivious as to how commodities work.

 

If it were purely driven by market forces, there would be causation. One would see that the price of oil mirrored EXACTLY what the demand in the marketplace was at the time. Obviously, it does not. There's a decent correlation (and a weaker one when the economy dips), but it's clearly not causation. Otherwise, the political posturing over the Strait of Hormuz (which resulted in no dip in oil supply) would've had NO effect on the market. And, wouldn't you know it, oil prices rose.

[Hacker 82]

Doritos, duh. ;)

 

My point is that commodities, much like stocks, are not completely immune from political pressure. Hence, why the comparison to Doritos is a bad one. I don't understand why many on the left believe that oil prices are driven completely by market forces. It's so obvious. The only way one could miss seeing it is if one is completely oblivious as to how commodities work.

 

If it were purely driven by market forces, there would be causation. One would see that the price of oil mirrored EXACTLY what the demand in the marketplace was at the time. Obviously, it does not. There's a decent correlation (and a weaker one when the economy dips), but it's clearly not causation. Otherwise, the political posturing over the Strait of Hormuz (which resulted in no dip in oil supply) would've had NO effect on the market. And, wouldn't you know it, oil prices rose.

 

Ahh, but you missed the point. Oil like all other commodities, are driven by outside forces, including the ones I mentioned. Sadly, fear is often the force that drives much speculation.