OT: US Military predicts peak oil within 2 years - US politicians and newspapers don't notice
John the Savage
might catch on someplace. Now, I give up. It's remarkable that
something like this gets reported around the world, but gets nearly
completely ignored here at home.
Ya know, we've got way bigger problems than the oil leaking in the Gulf
right now. And we're *all* to blame for that, anyway. Myself included.
Back to the point..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/11/peak-oil-production-supply
Highlights:
---
The energy crisis outlined in a Joint Operating Environment report from
the US Joint Forces Command, comes as the price of petrol in Britain
reaches record levels and the cost of crude is predicted to soon top
$100 a barrel.
"By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and
as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million
barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior
commander, General James N Mattis.
It adds: "While it is difficult to predict precisely what economic,
political, and strategic effects such a shortfall might produce, it
surely would reduce the prospects for growth in both the developing and
developed worlds. Such an economic slowdown would exacerbate other
unresolved tensions, push fragile and failing states further down the
path toward collapse, and perhaps have serious economic impact on both
China and India."
---
Hmm. I guess we just don't think this is a story, eh? Naw. Let's just
close our eyes and hum some more, shall we?
On a more opinionated note, I'd like to assert right now that this is
the biggest failure of, and my biggest personal disappointment in, the
Obama administration to this point. I honestly thought this guy might
have the guts to raise this issue. It appears he does not. You cannot
tell me that when the US Military makes a report like this, that is
picked up as a news item around the world, that the President isn't
aware. And you can't tell me this isn't something that should be part
of our public discourse in America today.
Why are they not talking about it? Why is this story continually
buried? Why are our politicians afraid to address it? I know what my
answer is. What's yours?
johnny_t
Now what would you have us do? Apparently the sun is coming up tomorrow
as well.
--
If it doesn't fit on a bumper
sticker, Republicans can't un
Clave in RGP
John the Savage
>
> Now what would you have us do? Apparently the sun is coming up tomorrow
> as well.
>
Johnny, I've been noticing that you've been stringing sentences together
recently without making yourself look like you dropped English in the
third grade. For that, I'd like to congratulate you.
But right now I have to ask you a question. What the fuck are you
trying to say?
Nevermind what I would have us do. I'd be happy if we just talked about
it, and I've been trying to get us to talk about it for many years, both
here, and with family and friends, with coworkers, or with anyone else
who cares to listen. Talking would be a start. We need to realize
what's happening.
Do you mean to say that it's obvious to you? So, the US Military is
suggesting that global growth will stop within 5 years, that massive
instability is nearing, and that oil shortages and skyrocketing prices
will be upon us before the 2016 Presidential election. This is as
obvious as the sun coming up tomorrow? Is that what you think most
people in America believe?
Please, johnny_t, enlighten me. Tell me what the fuck you are trying to
say with this bit about the Sun.
BillB
> "By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and
> as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million
> barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior
> commander, General James N Mattis.
I'm not sure exactly what that means. Shouldn't the price rise until
there is a supply and demand equilibrium?
We have the solution already. Isn't something like 65% of oil production
going toward transportation? First there will be the shift to more
energy efficient modes of transportation and higher density urban
housing. That is already taking place. When the price gets high enough,
there will be a rapid shift to nuclear power, hydrogen production, and
natural gas.
To answer your question about why nobody is talking about it...gasoline
is still dirt cheap. That's why nobody seems too worried. The average
inflation adjusted price of gas over the last century is probably about
$2.50/gallon, but cars are so much more fuel efficient than they have
ever been that I would venture to guess that average per mile prices
have rarely, if ever, been lower as a function of wages. For example,
the average return work commute uses about $3 worth of gas to make an
average day's pay of $140. I don't think we are anywhere near crisis
mode yet.
johnny_t
> Please, johnny_t, enlighten me. Tell me what the fuck you are trying to
> say with this bit about the Sun.
That it is inevitable. It is being as planned for as possible. Do you
want us running around scared and screaming? Putting rice in the
basement and buying junk silver?
I suspect that what will happen, is that things will change. That there
will continue to be energy, that somethings will be more expensive, but
mostly things will change?
What would YOU have us to do? Talk about it? Cripes, why? If it's
coming, and it's coming this fast, things will change pretty darn quick!
Like the sun coming up tomorrow.
The people that matter, those that plan and think about precisely this
stuff, are.
But just for homework. Just a little thing that may calm you down a
bit. How much oil is in the Alberta tar sands?
John the Savage
> On 30/04/2010 7:39 PM, John the Savage wrote:
>
>
>> "By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and
>> as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million
>> barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior
>> commander, General James N Mattis.
>
> I'm not sure exactly what that means. Shouldn't the price rise until
> there is a supply and demand equilibrium?
Well, I think the idea is that demand has never been limited in this way
by supply before. Global demand has steadily increased, always, and
supply has always been able to rise up to match it. We are quickly
approaching a tipping point at which that will no longer be possible.
While I guess you are right about the economics of supply and demand, my
feeling is that the "equilibrium price" that will be reached in such a
scenario is going to be sky high, to the point that it breaks the global
economy which depends on cheap oil. There will be no more growth, and
as the military suggests, this is likely to lead to significant
instability.
>
> We have the solution already. Isn't something like 65% of oil production
> going toward transportation? First there will be the shift to more
> energy efficient modes of transportation and higher density urban
> housing. That is already taking place. When the price gets high enough,
> there will be a rapid shift to nuclear power, hydrogen production, and
> natural gas.
>
I think most are drastically underestimating the pace at which this
needs to happen. If oil will no longer be viable in five or ten years
to do most of the jobs it does today, we have a major problem on our
hands of shifting our infrastructure and bringing all these new
technologies online very, very quickly. We need to be doing it
yesterday. I don't think the market will be able to react fast enough.
I think bringing new technologies online so broadly will take decades.
I'd love to be wrong.
> To answer your question about why nobody is talking about it...gasoline
> is still dirt cheap. That's why nobody seems too worried. The average
> inflation adjusted price of gas over the last century is probably about
> $2.50/gallon, but cars are so much more fuel efficient than they have
> ever been that I would venture to guess that average per mile prices
> have rarely, if ever, been lower as a function of wages. For example,
> the average return work commute uses about $3 worth of gas to make an
> average day's pay of $140. I don't think we are anywhere near crisis
> mode yet.
Well, two years ago many people felt like we were in a crisis mode, and
I'm not sure we'd have the President we have now were it not for the
huge spikes in oil and gasoline prices we saw in early '08. Since then,
the economy collapsed (in a striking coincidence) which led to
plummeting demand and brought the prices back down. According to this
report, and speculation about where oil prices will be as soon as this
summer that has occurred recently, oil and gas prices are poised to
reach and greatly exceed '08 levels within the next few years. Then
we'll see who is talking about it, and whether or not it qualifies as a
crisis.
The bottom line, in my opinion, is that if peak oil is just a few years
away, and shortages are going to occur in the same time frame, it should
be a topic of discussion. It should be a feature in the public debate.
Our politicians must know about it, and they damn well ought to be
telling us about it, and talking about it themselves, and making the
sort of choices necessary to prepare for the rapid and vast changes that
we must make as soon as possible.
John the Savage
> On 4/30/10 7:53 PM, John the Savage wrote:
>
>> Please, johnny_t, enlighten me. Tell me what the fuck you are trying to
>> say with this bit about the Sun.
>
> That it is inevitable. It is being as planned for as possible.
Well, it seems like the estimates for the date of peak oil keep getting
moved up all of the time. If it's coming within a few years, with
supply shortfalls and skyrocketing prices arriving on the same time
frame, I think that will be a surprise to most of corporate America. I
don't see the planning you have so much confidence in. I barely see it
at all, and what I do see is not nearly adequate.
If you believe the TV ads, it seems like it's the oil companies who are
planning for it, right? With that fucking algae, or whatever it is
they're working on. What's not to trust?! If there's anybody we can
trust to find alternatives to oil, it's the oil companies. Amirite?
> Do you
> want us running around scared and screaming? Putting rice in the
> basement and buying junk silver?
No dude. If the global economy shreds because of this, storing rice
ain't gonna help anything. Nobody will give a shit about silver. You
may be more likely to be somebody's dinner than you are to be eating dinner.
>
> I suspect that what will happen, is that things will change. That there
> will continue to be energy, that somethings will be more expensive, but
> mostly things will change?
Oh, I see. So when you say "the sun will come up tomorrow", you mean
things will change. You really do have a way with a metaphor.
> What would YOU have us to do? Talk about it? Cripes, why? If it's
> coming, and it's coming this fast, things will change pretty darn quick!
> Like the sun coming up tomorrow.
This is really brilliant. Nothing illustrates the idea of rapid change
like the Sun coming up tomorrow. It's like I'm talking to Jesus. You
are a real purveyor of parable.
> The people that matter, those that plan and think about precisely this
> stuff, are.
>
> But just for homework. Just a little thing that may calm you down a bit.
> How much oil is in the Alberta tar sands?
Not enough. And how much does it cost to get it? The issue is not when
we run out of oil, it's when we run out of cheap, economically viable
oil. And I've got enough homework to do, thank you.
Arlo-Payne
> The bottom line, in my opinion, is that if peak oil is just a few years
> away, and shortages are going to occur in the same time frame, it should
> be a topic of discussion. It should be a feature in the public debate.
> Our politicians must know about it, and they damn well ought to be
> telling us about it, and talking about it themselves, and making the
> sort of choices necessary to prepare for the rapid and vast changes that
> we must make as soon as possible.
Why waste the tiime and effort.
The public IQ is so low they will never come up with an idea. Leave where
it is in the hands of those that understand the possible problems not the
chicken littles. Just look at global warming and how far off base that is
now with all the braindeads drinking the punch.
----�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
ChrisRobin
> We have the solution already. Isn't something like 65% of oil production
> going toward transportation? First there will be the shift to more
> energy efficient modes of transportation and higher density urban
> housing. That is already taking place. When the price gets high enough,
> there will be a rapid shift to nuclear power, hydrogen production, and
> natural gas.
And therein lies the disconnect. There is no such thing as a "rapid shift"
to alternate energy sources, particularly those used to power
transportation. It's impossible. It'll require retooling the entirety of
our transportation infrastructure, a process that will require extremely
high (and expensive) inputs of fossil fuel energy. In an era of peaking
oil production and scarce investment dollars, finding the resources, cash,
and political will will require a major miracle.
-------�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
BillB
> And therein lies the disconnect. There is no such thing as a "rapid shift"
> to alternate energy sources, particularly those used to power
> transportation. It's impossible.
It's a relative term. I meant as quickly as possible. It won't take that
long in the grand scheme of things. Look how fast some of the other
transformative changes have taken place in the last century. We've
already got mass produced electric cars coming down the pike (thanks
GM). It doesn't take that long to build nuclear power plants.It's the
political process that causes most of the delay. It doesn't take that
long to convert fleet vehicles to natural gas. I really don't believe in
doomsday scenarios with runaway oil prices occurring overnight. Oil
production increases will probably slow, level off and slowly deline
over decades. The military is famous for its doomsday reports.
The solutions are there. All that's missing is the political will to
exploit them. I believe that will change in a big hurry if oil prices
start to make a serious impact on our way of life. The powers that be
should start preparing now, because it's definitely coming eventually,
but that's just not the way human nature operates.
joeturn
in 1910 by remote control without any oil, just free energy?
Did you know that Thomas Henry Moray in 1935 was shot and killed for
lighting up 1000 floresent bulbs 25 miles from the nearest power line?
Did you know that was twice the distance that barges were guided by
slaves pulling them with ropes on the Erie Canal?
joeturn
An excerpt from this link proves that 50 years ago Einstein did not
know his ass from a hole in the ground!
Old Albert was nothing more than a Government hired puppet to herd us
away from free energy!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Energy = MCsquared is balony Matter/Mass had nothing to do with Energy
at all.
In the universe we see the same laws being obeyed as in our
laboratories. As one traces down to the almost infinitesimal
constituents of the atom, one finds that matter does not exist at all
as the realistic substance which we have supposed it to be. There at
the very foundation, it consists of nothing more than energy charges
emitted at various wavelengths or frequencies. It is becoming more and
more certain that the apparent complexity of nature is due to our lack
of knowledge. And, as the picture unfolds, it promises a marvelous
simplicity.
joeturn
da pickle
> OK. Apologies for linking a three week old story, but I was hoping it
> might catch on someplace. Now, I give up. It's remarkable that
> something like this gets reported around the world, but gets nearly
> completely ignored here at home.
The stories are varied, but they are "old."
http://www.omninerd.com/articles/What_You_Need_to_Know_about_Peak_Oil
Jerry Sturdivant
"joeturn" <joetu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:acd32e6e-2708-4f08...@k19g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
That, too, is political in nature. I always suspected Nevada was holding out for money. All residence of Alaska (from particular date) get a monthly check, because, "you were there when big oil needed an okay to drill."
I suspect the local folks, here in Vegas, were quietly stirred by big oil (& Coal). They have the most to lose from nuclear power.
When I lived in the northwest I toured WHOOPS. There are a number of nuke plants, very close to going on line.
http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=274
But like he said, it's all about politics. "Don't drill for oil because you'll make a mess." "Don't build nukes because they might explode."
Jerry 'n Vegas
johnny_t
> Not enough. And how much does it cost to get it? The issue is not when
> we run out of oil, it's when we run out of cheap, economically viable
> oil. And I've got enough homework to do, thank you.
If it happens so quickly, nothing we do will change that. You're
hysteria certainly doesn't help. Apparently you seem to have plenty of
time. You are running around wanting us to do something, anything,
about the inevitable. You go ahead there sparky.
As to the tar oils. There is more there than everywhere else that we
know. And it is viable about 140 or so a barrel.
Yes, things will change when we can no longer use so much oil for energy
creation or driving.
Oh, and yes, we can put up power plants that don't run on oil, and we
can make cars that don't run on oil. We can switch pretty darn fast.
Know when we will?
When it is economically reasonable to do so.
John the Savage
> On 4/30/10 9:21 PM, John the Savage wrote:
>> Not enough. And how much does it cost to get it? The issue is not when
>> we run out of oil, it's when we run out of cheap, economically viable
>> oil. And I've got enough homework to do, thank you.
>
> If it happens so quickly, nothing we do will change that. You're
> hysteria certainly doesn't help. Apparently you seem to have plenty of
> time. You are running around wanting us to do something, anything, about
> the inevitable. You go ahead there sparky.
>
> As to the tar oils. There is more there than everywhere else that we
> know. And it is viable about 140 or so a barrel.
>
> Yes, things will change when we can no longer use so much oil for energy
> creation or driving.
>
> Oh, and yes, we can put up power plants that don't run on oil, and we
> can make cars that don't run on oil. We can switch pretty darn fast.
> Know when we will?
>
A couple points.
I am not anywhere near hysterical. There are plenty of voices saying
the same thing I am, and just because the conclusions of our analyses
might be considered alarming does not mean the analysts are hysterical.
While I may feel it is inevitable, I feel the sooner we start talking
about it and thinking about how serious the issues are, the better a
chance we'll all have of making it as long and as well as possible.
There's no telling what the world will come up with if the world really
gave it an honest effort. Something big has to change, because infinite
growth on a finite planet is a fucking absurd premise, and it's what
this whole thing is based on.
You are way too optimistic about how quickly we can "switch" the
essential technology that runs our entire civilization. And about this
oil sands business: even when it come viable, it doesn't figure to
change the essentially bell shaped curve of global oil production. Yes,
the downside of the curve is filled with more expensive, more difficult
to acquire oil. This is the *problem*, not a solution. When demand
continues to increase while supply no longer can, one of two things must
happen. (1) Price rises exponentially (2) The world economy enters a
long term shrink which sinks demand and keeps prices at usable levels.
Neither scenario is very pleasant.
Lastly, don't fucking call me sparky. Who the hell are you? Why am I
wasting my time trying to explain anything to your smug, remedial,
senile self? I'd be better off replying to ole' Joe Turn up there. Is
there anyone on RGP who gives a shit what you say, about anything? Can
you find one person?
But you're getting a pass for the rest of this thread, so go nuts. My
dog lost his battle with epilepsy today. He was euthanized at the vet
this morning. And I just don't feel like doing this shit right now.
Have fun.
da pickle
> But you're getting a pass for the rest of this thread, so go nuts. My dog
> lost his battle with epilepsy today. He was euthanized at the vet this
> morning. And I just don't feel like doing this shit right now. Have fun.
That is really sad. Sorry for your loss.
John the Savage
Thanks. It's been a tough day. He's been getting worse over the last
year or so and this week he'd been clustering them since Tuesday night.
Huge amounts of drugs wouldn't stop them this time, and he had lost
the ability to move his back legs. I didn't feel like making a thread
about it, but I know there are at least a few folks here who have shown
an interest in the guy over the years, so I thought I should mention it
somehow.
Maybe I was a little too hard on johnny_t, also. I dunno. Sorry.
Anyway, thanks.
BillB
"John the Savage" <savag...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9c6dnTeSlb1450HW...@giganews.com...
> When demand continues to increase while supply no longer can, one of two
> things must happen. (1) Price rises exponentially
Exponentially? I don't think so.
> Is there anyone on RGP who gives a shit what you say, about anything? Can
> you find one person?
Here I am.
John the Savage
>
> "John the Savage" <savag...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9c6dnTeSlb1450HW...@giganews.com...
>
>> When demand continues to increase while supply no longer can, one of
>> two things must happen. (1) Price rises exponentially
>
> Exponentially? I don't think so.
I do.
http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/5110#more
>> Is there anyone on RGP who gives a shit what you say, about anything?
>> Can you find one person?
>
> Here I am.
Well, uh, I stand corrected.
BillB
> On 5/1/10 5:04 PM, BillB wrote:
>>
>> "John the Savage" <savag...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:9c6dnTeSlb1450HW...@giganews.com...
>>
>>> When demand continues to increase while supply no longer can, one of
>>> two things must happen. (1) Price rises exponentially
>>
>> Exponentially? I don't think so.
>
> I do.
They must have changed the laws of economics when I wasn't looking.
John the Savage
Well it would be more helpful if you said something constructive. Did
you look at the link? The supply curve is a steep exponential. No
matter how high the price goes, supply is up against the wall, because
this is a finite resource at its production peak (in fact this curve
will move leftward as oil production declines). As the demand curve
(which is steep in the case of oil) moves to the right, the point where
the curves cross rises exponentially along the y-axis (price).
johnny_t
> Is there anyone on RGP who gives a shit what you say, about anything? Can
> you find one person?
Whatever, chose not to respond. It's ok. But I get to respond if I
chose, that is the Usenet.
> But you're getting a pass for the rest of this thread, so go nuts. My
> dog lost his battle with epilepsy today. He was euthanized at the vet
> this morning. And I just don't feel like doing this shit right now. Have
> fun.
Ok...
We are not likely to fall off a cliff. Yes, there is likely to be a
run-up to about 150 bucks a barrel. We have ALOT of oil for that
amount. More than enough, more than the charts show. For Decades. The
tar sands by themselves represent more oil as we have used to date.
There will be a dramatic downturn in demand. Just as there has been,
and as there was. This will mean that supply will actually even be more
than enough. The downturn in demand will not be as much a downturn in
the economy as you may imagine. A lot will be productivity improvements.
If you want to worry about something, it is actually refining
capability. We max out that before we max out oil supply. Oil
companies have been trying to time this all out for decades.
At 150 bucks a barrel, there are tons of other interesting energy
choices that start making economic sense.
Just because Energy becomes a higher portion of production costs, does
not mean that growth has to end. There will continue to be many things
available to do. Something which were solely based on leveraging energy
cheapness will change.
Somethings will use alternate fuels (airplanes and cars being the two
most logical). Some will use the same (trains and boats), and other
energy will transfer to other non petro sources largely, some green some
nuclear (Nuclear just has too many good things about it when talking
about the grid, that balance out wind, solar and other). Other things
will become more efficient in many ways, like computers, television, and
lighting. The drop in demand by these three things have the power to
drop the demand curve all by themselves for at least a decade or two on
most peak oil graphs. (despite the incandescent horders).
When the switch happens, this will last us at least another 100 years of
similar life quality and economic structure. Long enough that George
Bush's unfunded mandates might actually be paid for.
This will give us plenty of time to figure out the NEXT thing that we
are going to do.
I am sorry about your dog.
But don't worry so much about this. There will be crisis, but in the
world of things, this isn't that bad. The free market will actually
work reasonably well here I think. Civilization will not fail. No blood
in the streets etc. One of the huge keys is that there is lots and lots
of oil that is available at $140.00 bucks a barrel or so. All over the
world. This is why there won't be the crisis that you expect. Also
when we are now paying that amount, other energy sources become
economically reasonable. There will be a lot of choppiness as demand
fluctuates around supply. It will be ok. Peak oil, is not the end of
the world.
ChrisRobin
> On 30/04/2010 10:57 PM, ChrisRobin wrote:
>
>
> > And therein lies the disconnect. There is no such thing as a "rapid shift"
> > to alternate energy sources, particularly those used to power
> > transportation. It's impossible.
>
> It's a relative term. I meant as quickly as possible. It won't take that
> long in the grand scheme of things. Look how fast some of the other
> transformative changes have taken place in the last century. We've
> already got mass produced electric cars coming down the pike (thanks
> GM).
They've been talking about the electric car revolution for decades.
> It doesn't take that long to build nuclear power plants.It's the
> political process that causes most of the delay. It doesn't take that
> long to convert fleet vehicles to natural gas. I really don't believe in
> doomsday scenarios with runaway oil prices occurring overnight. Oil
> production increases will probably slow, level off and slowly deline
> over decades. The military is famous for its doomsday reports.
My understanding was that nuclear plants take an awfully long time to
build (didn't the last plant built take more than 2 decades?). I'm far
from an authority on the subject, but that's an awful lot of construction
and capital in an economy facing limited growth potential for precisely
the reason they need to be built in the first place: declining oil
production.
> The solutions are there. All that's missing is the political will to
> exploit them. I believe that will change in a big hurry if oil prices
> start to make a serious impact on our way of life. The powers that be
> should start preparing now, because it's definitely coming eventually,
> but that's just not the way human nature operates.
I hope you're right. Down here in the good ol' US, political will to
tackle daunting-yet-painfully-obvious problems seems to be sorely absent.
______________________________________________________________________�
Bob Boudreaux
> OK. Apologies for linking a three week old story, but I was hoping it
> might catch on someplace. Now, I give up. It's remarkable that
> something like this gets reported around the world, but gets nearly
> completely ignored here at home.
>
> right now. And we're *all* to blame for that, anyway. Myself included.
> Back to the point..
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/11/peak-oil-production-supply
>
> Highlights:
>
> ---
> The energy crisis outlined in a Joint Operating Environment report from
> the US Joint Forces Command, comes as the price of petrol in Britain
> reaches record levels and the cost of crude is predicted to soon top
> $100 a barrel.
>
> "By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and
> as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million
> barrels per day," says the report, which has a foreword by a senior
> commander, General James N Mattis.
>
> political, and strategic effects such a shortfall might produce, it
> surely would reduce the prospects for growth in both the developing and
> developed worlds. Such an economic slowdown would exacerbate other
> unresolved tensions, push fragile and failing states further down the
> path toward collapse, and perhaps have serious economic impact on both
> China and India."
> ---
>
> Hmm. I guess we just don't think this is a story, eh? Naw. Let's just
> close our eyes and hum some more, shall we?
>
> On a more opinionated note, I'd like to assert right now that this is
> the biggest failure of, and my biggest personal disappointment in, the
> Obama administration to this point. I honestly thought this guy might
> have the guts to raise this issue. It appears he does not. You cannot
> tell me that when the US Military makes a report like this, that is
> picked up as a news item around the world, that the President isn't
> aware. And you can't tell me this isn't something that should be part of
> our public discourse in America today.
>
> Why are they not talking about it? Why is this story continually buried?
> Why are our politicians afraid to address it? I know what my answer is.
> What's yours?
You put way too much stock in who the president
is and what he does. He does what he is told, and
nothing more. You don't actually thinkthis person
calls any shots do you?