Put the man made or not argument aside for a moment... Are all you posters so dense that you don't understand that 'warming' equates to an increase of energy, and that less sea ice at the poles and warmer tempuratures equates to additional moisture in the atmosphere?? So let's just assume that 'climate change' is not man made and is just a cycle caused by the sun, or pixies with magic dust or whatever you want to believe. The simple fact is the climate can change, more energy and moisture can be introduced into the system as a result and all differences of potential (aka storms) will be more intense/severe (more rain / snow). Of course oposite is also true, the climate can change and the result can be a decrease in energy and moisture resulting in less frequent and intense storms. Make sense?

Think about this next time your at the pump... These are your dollars at work. It's funny how there seems to be no 'outrage' by all the Drudge heads... Wake up lemmings!!

I responded to this.. "When someone tells me they voted for the obamination, I am done with them.. Their judgement and intelligence are so compromised, they can't be trusted on anything"
 
But I guess that wouldn't be considered name calling or an attempt to discredit ones views or opinions.  I welcome debate and conversation.  What questions are the conservatives among us not getting answered?  All I hear republicans say is Socialism this, birth certificate that, I'm against this...
 
Obama agrees to 'Drill baby drill' and guess what, now its a bad idea. 
 
I get the Red Sox / Yankees / Mets opposition, I don't get the US v THEM politics embraced by both sides today.
 

Right on. I am confused by your Barny Frank comments however.  Republicans held the power of congress until the 06 elections, so Dems didn't take over until '07...  The house of cards was well built by then.
 
Besides there was no law passed, or federal requirement saying banks had to lend.  Bankers are just greedy and made a choice to lend to less than worthy borrowers.  There certainly was no law requiring teaser rates, or negative amortization, or no doc loans, the list of schemes is endless you honestly don't believe that there was do you? 
 
I know its all the poor mans fault with no wealth or power or connections who somehow got a banker to believe it was a good idea to give him money.  Come on these loans made 'buy-here pay-here' loans good.  A prepayment penalty??  Are you kidding?  I'm not saying the poor man is a victim, but at the same time if the poor man thought it seemed too good to be true all he had to do was look to either side of him and see everyone else doing it and is fear was forgotten.  Doesn't make it right, but it does make a case for the repealing of Gramm-Leach-Bliley act, aka reinstatement Glass-Steagall.  
 
GLB was horse trading at its finest.  A true example of bipartisanship, and a great example of Clinton's hypocrisy.  
 
The cycle perpetuated because if an investment banker thought it was too risky he soon forgot all about it when he too looked to either side of him and saw his competition literally passing out money on the streets.
 
The lie here is that somehow its the governments fault that banks got in trouble.  The tragedy is the banks convinced FRE and FNM to adopt their suicide practices in early '06 when the Goldmans, Morgans, and the like were running out of places to bury their garbage.
 
I distrust democrats right along with the rest of you.  But I distrust republicans more because the republicans of wealth and power indoctrinate hard working middle class folks with rhetoric of country, god, guns, and values along with a good dose of fear to gain support for their agenda.
 
We are no longer a government for the people, but rather a government for the lobbyist and special interest.  Both sides want us polarized because then we are of no threat.  The real threat to power occurs when we are organized as one.
 
In order to stand together as one, we must stand.
  
 
 

I couldn't agree more.  Aside from my township board and supervisor most politicians are liars.  I know, I know, everyone says all but my guy, but they truly are honest people.
 
Retiring nearly half a trillion dollars of debt and ceasing the issuance of 7-yr and 30-yr treasuries was no lie, it happened. 
 
I won't play what-ifs on the Iraq war and it's cost or argue the truthfulness of its pretenses, but the tax cuts that benefited the few only stole money from the SSI trust and are fair game.  The lie then was it was money that should be given back.  The truth was it was money that needed to be repaid.
 
History will judge that decision, I'm young enough to see it play out god willing.
 

I have heard of subsidies, and I prefer to call it a corn subsidy not a farm subsidy.  I am against all corporate welfare including farm subsidies.
 
Valuation of the dollar is little effected if at all by currency exchanges for crude purchases.  The oil supply and purchase chain is probably the most price efficient market in the world.  There is little room for arbitrage.
 
The Euro$ has no army and therefore is unlikely to become the global reserve replacement for the dollar, besides the Euro$ and GBP are in free fall.  The dollar is the global reserve currency because we are the largest consuming nation, with the strongest military.  China's RMB is the only threat to the dollar. 
 
I am not betting on a stronger dollar, and actually oppose a strong dollar since it allows us to sweep our structural problems under the rug by importing deflation, while at the same time exporting American jobs... compounding the problem.

So here we are... No one wants to see taxes increased, no one wants there SSI check cut, no one wants to see their 'program' cut.  But the debts of the past born by all of us red and blue alike are not fundable.  So I would have to agree with you at some point in time debt will have to be monetized.  Especially when you consider how the Treasury has structured all of the roll over an recent issuance of debt on the short maturity side.  We are borrowing virtually overnight money and lending 30 year money.  When not if the world gets spooked the US Treasury will be in the same situation as Lehman Bros, and Bear Sterns.  
 
These problems are not the result of one election, one man, or one congress but rather the cumulative effect of a politically apathetic society.  Some presidential elections in recent times had less than 60% turnout.
 
 But now we have gone from apathetic to US vs THEM politics which is potentially more destructive.  None of us are perfect, and no one answer is the solution, we all need to work on incorporating the good ideas from either side into sound policy.  But that would require politicians to educate themselves and due real work all the while making it tougher to get reelected so it will never happen.  Instead they will continue to foster polarization for their gain and our demise.
 
Some of you may be shocked to know the Drudge Report is my home page.  :)
 
 
 
 
 

I agree its a mess decades in the making, and as such there are cost to bear.

The pending SSI insolvency is a product of both democrats and republicans allowing the treasury to 'borrow' the surpluses. Good luck seeing every dollar pumped into SSI coming out.

Yep, your right. It happened overnight. Hmm... Back in Clinton's time republicans took credit for the success by saying it takes years for the fruits of a policy to pay off and prosperity was a result of Bush 1.

Those are some strong RNC amnesia pills they send you guys.

What a narrow mind!! This place is such an echo chamber. Put down the kool-aid

College Degree. Check.
Job. Check
Home. Check
Understanding of economics. Check.

Collection of entitlements. NOPE. I pay in, but don't get out. And by the time I retire the boomers will have sucked SSI dry. Are you one of them?

I will agree with you on the potential of energy inflation, but this should be of no surprise to anyone. When you consume a finite resource you run out. If you demand more of a resource then can be produced the price increases. When you rely on your 'enemy' for your national security (crude) you risk supply shocks.

It would seem to me most republicans would support energy independence. Out side of 'drill baby drill' most do not. The facts are that if we drilled everywhere and brought all that production online tomorrow we would still import over 90% crude needs. Hardly the answer.