The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns
mtierney said:
Sorry I came across this story. Recently I got my second booster, Pfizer. My other three shots were Moderna. This last dose hit me the hardest— exhaustion, aches and joint pain, etc.
Small price to pay to avoid getting Covid, sure, but lots of people are getting extraordinarily richer!
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/what-has-happened-to-journalism-volume
Didn’t make it past the first sentence, I’m afraid. What’s it about?
ridski said:
Didn’t make it past the first sentence, I’m afraid. What’s it about?
The death of objective investigative journalism is my take. A tad late to the wake, however.
How do Democrats spell “disconnect” re global warming and fossil fuels? Hypocrisy.
From The Dispatch…
Don’t Call it Politics |
| The Strategic Petroleum Reserve storage at the Bryan Mound site in Freeport, Texas. (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images) |
When the White House announced yet another release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve last week, Republicans immediately cried foul, declaring it a politically motivated move. |
“No, it’s not,” says the President! |
We won’t claim to be mind readers, but the circumstantial evidence that the White House timed this announcement for an electoral boost is pretty darn strong. We’re mere weeks from the midterms, and polling is growing increasingly grim for Democrats while Biden’s approval ratings slip back down toward 40 percent. Voters often punish a president’s party for high gas prices, and though pump prices have fallen from their peak in June, they’ve crept back up from about $3.69 a gallon on average last month to about $3.80 Sunday. |
This latest release consists of 15 million barrels—the last batch of the largest-ever 180 million barrel drawdown Biden authorized in March—and leaves the SPR at its lowest level since the 1980s. It still has about 400 million barrels still available, per the White House. The barrels won’t actually be delivered until December, and Biden left the door open to order more. |
The administration credits previous SPR releases with loosening the market enough to bring gas prices down by as much as 40 cents a gallon this summer, and while this last batch is too small to make that much of a dent in the market, it could help convince voters the president is trying to relieve their pain at the pump. The announcement also gave the White House another chance to blame high prices on the war in Ukraine and greedy fuel companies keeping profits high at consumers’ expense. |
The Biden White House would hardly be the first to use the SPR for electoral expedience. In a particularly egregious example, then-President Bill Clinton ordered a 30 million barrel release shortly before the 2000 presidential election—right after Al Gore made it a campaign issue in his presidential bid. And the SPR has a long history as a piggy bank: Congress has for decades required non-emergency SPR selloffs, in some cases to raise money for modernizing the reserve’s storage or to test its readiness for emergencies, but often simply to raise revenue. |
But the SPR release isn’t the only oil news Biden has been explaining away of late. It comes on the heels of revelations that the administration pushed Saudi Arabia to delay announcing OPEC production cuts for a month—which would have helped ensure that the resulting oil price spike didn’t hit until after midterms. |
Administration officials insist their motives are pure and market-based. “We presented Saudi Arabia with analysis to show that there was no market basis to cut production targets, and that they could easily wait for the next OPEC meeting to see how things developed,” said John Kirby, National Security Council spokesman. Biden has threatened unspecified“consequences” for Saudi Arabia over OPEC’s decision to go ahead with the announcement, characterizing it as support for Russia—higher energy prices benefit the oil exporter and OPEC+ member. Saudi Arabia has dismissed those accusations but hasn’t soothed frustrations—Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, a longtime Saudi Arabia critic, suggested freezing military aid to the kingdom. |
Regardless, releasing oil and pushing for more is a weird look for a president who once promised to “end fossil fuel.” Swamped by politically deadly inflation—gasoline has been a major contributor—Biden has been talking out both sides of his mouth on oil. He’s quietly tried to pause oil and gas leases on public lands, then loudly scolded oil and gas companies for not drilling enough. Biden took advantage of the SPR release to take another shot at the industry. “My message to the American energy companies is this: you should not be using your profits to buy back stock or for dividends,” he said. “You should be using these record-breaking profits to increase production and refining.” |
But oil and gas companies know Biden ultimately wants to decrease their role in the energy market, and today’s high prices aren’t enough to incentivize pricey investment in more production and refinement capability. They need the promise of future demand at profitable prices—and the global economy’s slide toward recession isn’t encouraging on that score. |
The White House did try to address that concern—and assuage critics worried that the SPR is running too low—with a promise to refill the reserve at $67 to $72 a barrel, below current prices of about $94 a barrel for Brent crude, a global benchmark. That guarantees demand at a soft price floor even if economies cool. “We’re giving you more certainty,” Biden said. “So you can act now to increase oil production now.” |
But the industry may not be any more moved by this—ultimately temporary—measure than it has been by Biden’s shame game. “We urge caution in continuing to rely on short-term efforts that are no substitute for sound long-term policies that enable American energy leadership,” American Petroleum Institute head Mike Sommers said in a statement after the SPR release announcement. |
Analysts aren’t that impressed, either. “Throwing away emergency oil stocks to raise revenue or douse pump prices is a classic example of a short-sighted and expensive policy mistake,” said Robert McNally—a former White House energy adviser and founder of Rapidan Energy Group. He praised the administration for planning to refill the SPR and acknowledged the initial release in March was necessary when it appeared Russian supply might suddenly dry up, but argued the U.S. should hold off on draining it further. |
“Don’t use the SPR to stabilize global oil prices, much less defend a price floor or ceiling,” McNally said. “We’ll pay later when geopolitical disruptions hammer consumers with even bigger oil price spikes.” |
MTierney's sudden concern about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Can anyone remind of her posting concern when
Following the news of a drone attack on a Saudi oilfield, which sparked concern about global supply security, President Trump said he had authorized a release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
“Based on the attack on Saudi Arabia, which may have an impact on oil prices, I have authorized the release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, if needed, in a to-be-determined amount sufficient to keep the markets well-supplied,” the U.S. President said in a tweet late on Sunday. “I have also informed all appropriate agencies to expedite approvals of the oil pipelines currently in the permitting process in Texas and various other States.”
btw - Obama added to the SPR. Trump decreased the SPR reserves. Don't remember any MTierney concern then too.
In fact, the highest level ever for the SPR was in 2010, when Barack
Obama was president. Further, there was actually a net decline in the
SPR when President Trump was in office. When he took office in January
2017, the SPR contained 695 million barrels. When he left office four
years later, the SPR contained 638 million barrels. So not only is the
claim of filling it untrue, but the level of the SPR actually declined
while President Trump was in office.
mtierney said:
How do Democrats spell “disconnect” re global warming and fossil fuels? Hypocrisy.
From The Dispatch…
Don’t Call it Politics
The Strategic Petroleum Reserve storage at the Bryan Mound site in Freeport, Texas. (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
When the White House announced yet another release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve last week, Republicans immediately cried foul, declaring it a politically motivated move.
“No, it’s not,” says the President!
We won’t claim to be mind readers, but the circumstantial evidence that the White House timed this announcement for an electoral boost is pretty darn strong. We’re mere weeks from the midterms, and polling is growing increasingly grim for Democrats while Biden’s approval ratings slip back down toward 40 percent. Voters often punish a president’s party for high gas prices, and though pump prices have fallen from their peak in June, they’ve crept back up from about $3.69 a gallon on average last month to about $3.80 Sunday.
This latest release consists of 15 million barrels—the last batch of the largest-ever 180 million barrel drawdown Biden authorized in March—and leaves the SPR at its lowest level since the 1980s. It still has about 400 million barrels still available, per the White House. The barrels won’t actually be delivered until December, and Biden left the door open to order more.
The administration credits previous SPR releases with loosening the market enough to bring gas prices down by as much as 40 cents a gallon this summer, and while this last batch is too small to make that much of a dent in the market, it could help convince voters the president is trying to relieve their pain at the pump. The announcement also gave the White House another chance to blame high prices on the war in Ukraine and greedy fuel companies keeping profits high at consumers’ expense.
The Biden White House would hardly be the first to use the SPR for electoral expedience. In a particularly egregious example, then-President Bill Clinton ordered a 30 million barrel release shortly before the 2000 presidential election—right after Al Gore made it a campaign issue in his presidential bid. And the SPR has a long history as a piggy bank: Congress has for decades required non-emergency SPR selloffs, in some cases to raise money for modernizing the reserve’s storage or to test its readiness for emergencies, but often simply to raise revenue.
But the SPR release isn’t the only oil news Biden has been explaining away of late. It comes on the heels of revelations that the administration pushed Saudi Arabia to delay announcing OPEC production cuts for a month—which would have helped ensure that the resulting oil price spike didn’t hit until after midterms.
Administration officials insist their motives are pure and market-based. “We presented Saudi Arabia with analysis to show that there was no market basis to cut production targets, and that they could easily wait for the next OPEC meeting to see how things developed,” said John Kirby, National Security Council spokesman. Biden has threatened unspecified“consequences” for Saudi Arabia over OPEC’s decision to go ahead with the announcement, characterizing it as support for Russia—higher energy prices benefit the oil exporter and OPEC+ member. Saudi Arabia has dismissed those accusations but hasn’t soothed frustrations—Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, a longtime Saudi Arabia critic, suggested freezing military aid to the kingdom.
Regardless, releasing oil and pushing for more is a weird look for a president who once promised to “end fossil fuel.” Swamped by politically deadly inflation—gasoline has been a major contributor—Biden has been talking out both sides of his mouth on oil. He’s quietly tried to pause oil and gas leases on public lands, then loudly scolded oil and gas companies for not drilling enough. Biden took advantage of the SPR release to take another shot at the industry. “My message to the American energy companies is this: you should not be using your profits to buy back stock or for dividends,” he said. “You should be using these record-breaking profits to increase production and refining.”
But oil and gas companies know Biden ultimately wants to decrease their role in the energy market, and today’s high prices aren’t enough to incentivize pricey investment in more production and refinement capability. They need the promise of future demand at profitable prices—and the global economy’s slide toward recession isn’t encouraging on that score.
The White House did try to address that concern—and assuage critics worried that the SPR is running too low—with a promise to refill the reserve at $67 to $72 a barrel, below current prices of about $94 a barrel for Brent crude, a global benchmark. That guarantees demand at a soft price floor even if economies cool. “We’re giving you more certainty,” Biden said. “So you can act now to increase oil production now.”
But the industry may not be any more moved by this—ultimately temporary—measure than it has been by Biden’s shame game. “We urge caution in continuing to rely on short-term efforts that are no substitute for sound long-term policies that enable American energy leadership,” American Petroleum Institute head Mike Sommers said in a statement after the SPR release announcement.
Analysts aren’t that impressed, either. “Throwing away emergency oil stocks to raise revenue or douse pump prices is a classic example of a short-sighted and expensive policy mistake,” said Robert McNally—a former White House energy adviser and founder of Rapidan Energy Group. He praised the administration for planning to refill the SPR and acknowledged the initial release in March was necessary when it appeared Russian supply might suddenly dry up, but argued the U.S. should hold off on draining it further.
“Don’t use the SPR to stabilize global oil prices, much less defend a price floor or ceiling,” McNally said. “We’ll pay later when geopolitical disruptions hammer consumers with even bigger oil price spikes.”
how dare the president play politics to respond to Republicans playing politics over the price of gas!
As someone, long passed 80, I believe I can be allowed to make an observation on our President’s increasing confusion over the past few months. The longer he hangs on to the possibility he intends to run again, he makes finding another candidate more difficult for Dems. He is not playing fair with his own party.
The president is facing tough personal and family issues going forward — while the world is spinning closer to conflict every day.
mtierney said:
As someone, long passed 80, I believe I can be allowed to make an observation on our President’s increasing confusion over the past few months. The longer he hangs on to the possibility he intends to run again, he makes finding another candidate more difficult for Dems. He is not playing fair with his own party.
The president is facing tough personal and family issues going forward — while the world is spinning closer to conflict every day.
Aside from your tedious cartoon, I do think we have a problem with old politicians not knowing when to exit the stage gracefully.
With regard to H. Biden, it looks like he will be charged with fairly ordinary tax evasion crimes. I say ordinary because these crimes fall well short of the high intrigue you have been fantasizing about. Whether there is prison time in his future or just hefty penalties remains to be seen.
Re the student loans issues: I still find it fascinating that there’s so much controversy in the USA about this issue (which, to me, should be quite straight forward and uncomplicated) when last night, Canberra time, our federal Treasurer announced a return to fee-free vocational education nation-wide. This will mainly be within the TAFE system (technical and further education).
There’s much more to discuss in our new federal Budget but most would probably bore you 
Perhaps, the situation was misread, or the response, not understood?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/25/us/politics/us-saudi-oil-deal.html
FLASH…..CNN’s Erin Burnet did a segment on the southern border crisis tonight!
Upset Democrats acting out?
Isn’t it usual for most such victims to claim these attacks are political, especially in the glare of journalistic cameras?
(I recently read BBC and Guardian articles demonstrating that most Venezuelan emigres remain in Central an South America, rather than trying to move to the USA, even more 10 years after leaving Venezuela. Week-long migraine otherwise I’d hunt them and link here)
joanne said:
(I recently read BBC and Guardian articles demonstrating that most Venezuelan emigres remain in Central an South America, rather than trying to move to the USA, even more 10 years after leaving Venezuela. Week-long migraine otherwise I’d hunt them and link here)
It is an involuntary return due to US policy waffling.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-gatekeepers-woke-michael-lind
On my first cup of coffee, I see that the above link is filled with answers as to how America got from here to there, but I will need a lot more coffee to grasp its full significance. I am sure, based on previous interactions here, some will immediately see malevolent stupidity in the article or political nonsense by the left — or the right!
mtierney said:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-gatekeepers-woke-michael-lind
On my first cup of coffee, I see that the above link is filled with answers as to how America got from here to there, but I will need a lot more coffee to grasp its full significance. I am sure, based on previous interactions here, some will immediately see malevolent stupidity in the article or political nonsense by the left — or the right!
"This article is part of Wokeness, Social Justice, and Cancel Culture."
A thin veneer of "erudition" over screamingly hateful bigotry.
mtierney said:
joanne said:
(I recently read BBC and Guardian articles demonstrating that most Venezuelan emigres remain in Central an South America, rather than trying to move to the USA, even more 10 years after leaving Venezuela. Week-long migraine otherwise I’d hunt them and link here)
It is an involuntary return due to US policy waffling.
No, this is what Joanne is talking about:
"About 6.8 million Venezuelans have left their homeland since an economic crisis took hold in earnest in 2014 for the country of some 28 million people. Most have gone to nearby nations in Latin America and the Caribbean. More than 2.4 million are in Colombia."
[...]
"Data compiled by the Interagency Coordination Platform for Refugees and Migrants, which involves about 200 humanitarian organisations, show governments have recorded the arrival of 753,000 Venezuelan migrants, refugees and asylum seekers since November in 17 Latin American and Caribbean countries."
nohero said:
mtierney said:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/new-gatekeepers-woke-michael-lind
On my first cup of coffee, I see that the above link is filled with answers as to how America got from here to there, but I will need a lot more coffee to grasp its full significance. I am sure, based on previous interactions here, some will immediately see malevolent stupidity in the article or political nonsense by the left — or the right!
"This article is part of Wokeness, Social Justice, and Cancel Culture."
A thin veneer of "erudition" over screamingly hateful bigotry.
"Alas, only one solution to the threat of woke hegemony can possibly work: a massive and permanent expansion of the regulatory powers of American government."
His solution is literally tyranny.
And I'll edit to add that his solution exists only to solve an invented problem. There is no "woke hegemony" whatever TF that means. The author wants a tyrannical regime, and is using the made-up problem of "wokeness" to enact it.
the whining about "wokeness" is about 100 times more of a problem in this country than whatever it is these people are upset about.
Mtierney,
Can you define the term woke and explain why it is a bad thing?
tjohn said:
Mtierney,
Can you define the term woke and explain why it is a bad thing?
The internet is filled with definitions, so you can surely find one with which fits your opinion.
With the goal to disrespect what other other Americans believe to be true, woke folks pride themselves on the destruction of religious, political, patriotic, establishment mores — woe to anyone out there who say otherwise. If you have any “spunk” left after watching careers, etc vanish over a comment, you know there is a tough row to hoe ahead. Common sense will triump as the demands of the woke drift closer to the surreal.
mtierney said:
tjohn said:
Mtierney,
Can you define the term woke and explain why it is a bad thing?
The internet is filled with definitions, so you can surely find one with which fits your opinion.
With the goal to disrespect what other other Americans believe to be true, woke folks pride themselves on the destruction of religious, political, patriotic, establishment mores — woe to anyone out there who say otherwise. If you have any “spunk” left after watching careers, etc vanish over a comment, you know there is a tough row to hoe ahead. Common sense will triump as the demands of the woke drift closer to the surreal.
A while ago, a gay man I know in Maplewood asked a question along the lines of "How do I have a conversation with people who want to marginalize me and take away my rights?"
Now, to you, that is apparently the destruction of religious mores. To me, that is the destruction of a decent human being.
I am unaware of any significant religious mores that are compromised by granting full equality under the law to LGBTQ people?
As for the cancel culture you reference, that has been around in one form or another since the beginning of time.
mtierney said:
With the goal to disrespect what other other Americans believe to be true, woke folks pride themselves on the destruction of religious, political, patriotic, establishment mores — woe to anyone out there who say otherwise. If you have any “spunk” left after watching careers, etc vanish over a comment, you know there is a tough row to hoe ahead. Common sense will triump as the demands of the woke drift closer to the surreal.
So, in your case, the use of the word "woke" is to make this false accusation against people to whom you apply the label.
Public figures who write things like this are beneath contempt -
Every parent knows that our most important fight is keeping toxic wokeness out of schools.
— Mike Pompeo (@mikepompeo) October 27, 2022
If we lose the battle for the hearts and minds of our kids, nothing else will matter.
mtierney said:
tjohn said:
Mtierney,
Can you define the term woke and explain why it is a bad thing?
The internet is filled with definitions, so you can surely find one with which fits your opinion.
With the goal to disrespect what other other Americans believe to be true, woke folks pride themselves on the destruction of religious, political, patriotic, establishment mores — woe to anyone out there who say otherwise. If you have any “spunk” left after watching careers, etc vanish over a comment, you know there is a tough row to hoe ahead. Common sense will triump as the demands of the woke drift closer to the surreal.
wow, she actually gave an answer.
it's a **** up answer, but an answer nonetheless, so credit where credit is due.
Doesn't her definition pin Republicans as "woke"? After all, what is Trumpism if not a violent attack on religious, political, patriotic, and establishment mores?
Thank you, db, for having the guts to say something positive! Actually respond to most direct questions. Folks don’t like the answers.
For a change of topic, what is it that Biden is drinking? Koolaid?
 | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
 | ||||
| ||||
It's kind of sad that people rail against "wokeness" when it's really just the idea of treating other people with the respect that they deserve.
Isn't that what we were all taught as children? Seriously, what parents, schools, or religious groups taught that "**** your feelings" was the proper way to treat other people?
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
HUGE Rummage sale to benefit the Bloomfield High School Robotics Team Sale Date: Apr 27, 2024
More info
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Sorry I came across this story. Recently I got my second booster, Pfizer. My other three shots were Moderna. This last dose hit me the hardest— exhaustion, aches and joint pain, etc.
Small price to pay to avoid getting Covid, sure, but lots of people are getting extraordinarily richer!
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/what-has-happened-to-journalism-volume