Limits of Power

[sqkcrk]

If anyone thinks that either presidential candidate, or any for that matter, will be our national savior, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. The direction of our country isn't controlled by the President, though he or she can influence how things are done, such as Iraq.

What was set in motion by The Carter Doctrine has been carried out by all of the Presidents, and especially the Bureaucrats of Washington, since Carter left office.

"Get your house in order." is the message of "Limits of Power" by Andrew Besevich. I'm about half way through it and I recommend it to everyone who might like to learn more about how we got to where we are today.

Uncannily he mentions, almost predicts, that our economic crisis would happen and why. Mostly from wanting to expand our standard of living w/out regard to and at the expense of the standard of living of people on the other side of the world.

If you can get passed your own views of someone who takes a critical eye to our history and present day circumstances, you just might learn something. He seems pretty level headed and even handed to me.

[dragonfly]

If anyone thinks that either presidential candidate, or any for that matter, will be our national savior, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner here!;)


What was set in motion by The Carter Doctrine has been carried out by all of the Presidents, and especially the Bureaucrats of Washington, since Carter left office.



I dare say it was set in motion before Carter. It has become our national mindset.


Uncannily he mentions, almost predicts, that our economic crisis would happen and why. Mostly from wanting to expand our standard of living w/out regard to and at the expense of the standard of living of people on the other side of the world.



I haven't read the book, so I can't comment in any knowledgable way, but I don't believe that to be the case. I think it was and continues to be a problem here within our own population and the growing contention over peoples' attitudes about necessities, entitlements, perceived greed, and envy. Could you give me some reasons he thinks it is at the expense of people across the globe?

[JPK1NH]

The next president will likely have the opportunity to appoint at least on Supreme Court Justice....possibly the deciding vote on whether we move to Socialism or Move towards Less Govt or at least maintain the Status Quo.

The next POTUS will also act as a Check on a Moonbat Liberal Congress or be an enabler for loony legislation and runaway gov.....history has shown that a single party controlling both Congress AND the White House has led to horrid abuses of power.

[dragonfly]

The next president will likely have the opportunity to appoint at least on Supreme Court Justice....possibly the deciding vote on whether we move to Socialism or Move towards Less Govt or at least maintain the Status Quo.



Unless I've been missing something big here, I don't see the direct connection. It looks to me like it primarily lies within the power of congress. The prez can push for his agenda, and the congress can fund it or not. Or are you referring to more broad powers as in deciding what is constitutional or what is not?


The next POTUS will also act as a Check on a Moonbat Liberal Congress or be an enabler for loony legislation and runaway gov.....history has shown that a single party controlling both Congress AND the White House has led to horrid abuses of power.

I do believe your last statement to be true for the most part, but if congress is heavily enough divided, it really doesn't matter what the prez says or wants from what I see. The problem appears to be lifetime politicians who stop listening to their constituents and start doing what they personally desire, in addition to an increasingly weak group of Republicans. Over the past 50 or so years, the trend has been to increase the dependence of the population on the government, and both sides seem to be right in line with that idea.

[Eaglerock]

Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner here!;)




And what does he WIN Johnny?

[JPK1NH]

Unless I've been missing something big here, I don't see the direct connection. It looks to me like it primarily lies within the power of congress. The prez can push for his agenda, and the congress can fund it or not. Or are you referring to more broad powers as in deciding what is constitutional or what is not?



That all depends upon how much of a majority the party in control of Congress has.

Assume a Pres from Party A

AND

Assume Party B controls Congress.

No REAL big deal unless Congress has a veto proof majority.

If Party B controls both the Executive and Legislative Branches then we get a whole heap of poopy running down on the Taxpayer.

If on the other hand we have a President from Party A and a Congress controlled by Party B without a super-majority then we don't see a lot of nonsense legislation being passed.

Look at the Johnson years.....Democrat as POTUS and Democrat supermajority in Congress....it was a total disaster that we're still paying for (Great Society).

Look at the what happened under the New Deal, FDR and a Dem Supermajority in Congress.......what a disaster that we're still living with today.

There were plenty of abuses under the Bush Admin and a Republican Controlled Congress from 2000-2006

Point being....as much as you might dislike McCain....he may be the best thing for the country.

[dragonfly]

And what does he WIN Johnny?

It's the idea, not the prize.;) So many people tend to place their hopes for the future and their security in an idealized "savior" who will make everything better. It is what happens when people feel powerless to determine their own futures and fail to realize that we ARE what makes it better or worse. We have become complacent to accept what we are fed and feel secure with it. It's a loss of aliveness and a loss of essential mythology in our culture. A large segment of our population no longer feels energized. I personally think that our ever-increasing government is contributing to that loss of spirit in our people.

I'm reading a really interesting (to me) book right now. It was written by a native South African (Dutch I think) man who was a friend of CG Jung, whom I find absolutely fascinating. The author of the book describes some of his South African bushman friends and their cultures and tribal practices. There is an honesty and aliveness there that modern cultures have completely lost.

Anyway, how that ties into the conversation at hand is probably totally irrelevant.;)

[dragonfly]

That all depends upon how much of a majority the party in control of Congress has.

.

No REAL big deal unless Congress has a veto proof majority.



Yeah, that's what I was getting at.


If Party B controls both the Executive and Legislative Branches then we get a whole heap of poopy running down on the Taxpayer.



But if Party A is in control all around, Party A is spineless. That's what I have observed. Either way, it's all going in the same direction from what I can tell.

Point being....as much as you might dislike McCain....he may be the best thing for the country.

Even if he gets elected, he's one of the most liberal Republicans up there. It will be more of the same until a large portion of the population wakes up, which likely will not happen until we are collapsing in on ourselves. I understand your point, I just don't have any hopes that anything will change for the better. For the worse? Yes. It's probably just a matter of degrees.

[Eaglerock]

It's the idea, not the prize.;) So many people tend to place their hopes for the future and their security in an idealized "savior" who will make everything better.

I'm reading a really interesting (to me) book right now.
Anyway, how that ties into the conversation at hand is probably totally irrelevant.;)

I was going for the game show format :)
Need to share the name of the book.

[dragonfly]

I was going for the game show format :)


:D


Need to share the name of the book.

"Jung and the Story of Our Time" by Laurens Van Der Post. Published in '76 (picked it up at the Half Price Book Store). It's primarily about CG Jung and how he viewed the world's conflicts from a psychological standpoint, but it helps if you have some prior understanding of Jung's methods and his life. It's probably not anything the average reader would be interested in, but if you are not the average reader;), and are interested in theories that focus on "below the surface" relationships, it's another viewpoint to consider. If nothing else, and if completely irrelevant, it's entertaining.

[BoBn]

The direction of our country isn't controlled by the President, though he or she can influence how things are done, such as Iraq.




They violated the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books.
They violated the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violated the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violated the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violated the 8th Amendment by torturing at Gitmo.
They violated section 8 of the Constitution by starting illegal wars without declaration.

-Bob

[sqkcrk]

Could you give me some reasons he thinks it is at the expense of people across the globe?

One example may be, who benefits from our presence in Iraq? Not the Iraqies and the thousands of their dead.

We are there to secure for us a source of oil, in order to maintain our standard of living. As stated in the Carter Doctrine, that is what the middle east is, Our oil source.

[sqkcrk]

The next president will likely have the opportunity to appoint at least on Supreme Court Justice....possibly the deciding vote on whether we move to Socialism or Move towards Less Govt or at least maintain the Status Quo.

The next POTUS will also act as a Check on a Moonbat Liberal Congress or be an enabler for loony legislation and runaway gov.....history has shown that a single party controlling both Congress AND the White House has led to horrid abuses of power.

No check is neccasary. Congress has already relinquished its' check and balance power to the Executive Branch. Remember the reason the Democrats were swept into power? To bring an end to the war? They couldn't even push through a bill to unfund the Troops. A bill that Bush would have vetoed for sure. But at least they could have tried. But they didn't. They gave away their power.

[sqkcrk]

And what does he WIN Johnny?

Enlightenment?

[dragonfly]

We are there to secure for us a source of oil, in order to maintain our standard of living.
Are you certain? His words or yours?

[sqkcrk]

They violated the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books.
They violated the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violated the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violated the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violated the 8th Amendment by torturing at Gitmo.
They violated section 8 of the Constitution by starting illegal wars without declaration.

-Bob

So who we gonna take to which court? Like that'll ever happen. Yeah, right.

[sqkcrk]

Are you certain? His words or yours?

"Are you certain?"
Do you mean about why we are there?

My words and beliefs and the impression I've gotten from Bacevich.

He talks about what we did militarily in the years leading up to the war and why we did them. The primary reason seems to be to keep the oil in that region flowing. Such as, why was the USS Cole where it was when it was struck? And why was the gunship that shot down the airliner where it was when it shot the airliner down?

We were there initially at the request of oil producing countries that were having pipelines and transfer stations that were being blown up. Countries who supplied us w/ a large percentage of the oil that we need. And things progressed from there.

[Eaglerock]

Are you certain? His words or yours?

During the last election GW stated when someone asked about ending the war, "then someone else will get the oil". Yes this is about Oil. Even John McCain said not more than a week ago that he wanted us to be, independent and find other energy sources and drill for oil so we wouldn't have to have another war or go over there again. When he said that, I was like, SO HE JUST ADMITTED, we went to war for Oil.

[sqkcrk]

According to Bacevich, all Presidents since Carter have rewritten history, or put a spin on it anyway, to explain why they should be elected [to carry on the illusion that we do what we do for altruistic reasons (my words)]. Even Obama and McCain, but especially those already elected.

[dragonfly]

During the last election GW stated when someone asked about ending the war, "then someone else will get the oil". Yes this is about Oil.

So if that's the case, then why in the heck are so many people on the democrat side opposed to drilling here? If we want to keep our noses in our own business (and I certainly support that), then something has to give. Like it or not, our entire economy and way of life depends on oil, and nothing is yet there to replace it.

[sqkcrk]

So if that's the case, then why in the heck are so many people on the democrat side opposed to drilling here? If we want to keep our noses in our own business (and I certainly support that), then something has to give. Like it or not, our entire economy and way of life depends on oil, and nothing is yet there to replace it.

A. because they like their perks, a clean environment not messed up by ugly oil wells and their mobility, their cars. So, we'll trash someone elses landscape so we don't have to see what we are causing to occur. NIMBY, in the back and front yard of the other guys country. It's okay as long as I don't have to see it.

Like when NY State wanted to build prisons in the North Country (way Upstate), because "those folks are used to things like that", rather than in the Bronx, where the criminals were coming from.

B. because even if we opened all of the oil wells now in production and drilled new ones where we permit it, we still wouldn't have enough supply. So we will always be dependent on forgein suppliers for a percentage of the oil that we need, a large percent.

It's hard to believe, and especially to remember, that at one time, in the not so distant past, we were the leading producer of petroleum (oil). We better get those alternative sources of energy up and running fast. Before we go the way of the USSR.

[dragonfly]

You can't have your cake and eat it too.;)

If the mass of Americans wants to turn around and go back to living off the land, I can do it, but how many people do you think can handle basic survival? If our current way of living is abruptly disrupted, there will be chaos and mass hysteria. We want to have our life, but not do what is necessary to have it. It doesn't work that way.

[dragonfly]

B. because even if we opened all of the oil wells now in production and drilled new ones where we permit it, we still wouldn't have enough supply.

How do you know that? We don't even explore anymore as a general rule because it takes years to get past the EPA bureaucracy to even attempt production.

[sqkcrk]

You can't have your cake and eat it too.;)

If the mass of Americans wants to turn around and go back to living off the land, I can do it, but how many people do you think can handle basic survival? If our current way of living is abruptly disrupted, there will be chaos and mass hysteria. We want to have our life, but not do what is necessary to have it. It doesn't work that way.

I delivered some honey to a Mennonite store today. I asked the owner if the current crisis was effecting him any. He acted like he didn't really know what I was talking about. This guy is Mennonite, not Amish. I kinda thought that maybe he'd be more aware of wat goes on in the world. But maybe my assumption was mistaken.

[sqkcrk]

How do you know that? We don't even explore anymore as a general rule because it takes years to get past the EPA bureaucracy to even attempt production.

Well, I'm not real sure. But it must have come from somewhere. I just can't seem to remember where I heard it.

And didn't iddee have a friend who has a well that struck oil but couldn't pump it? There could be alot of those out there.

[dragonfly]

This guy is Mennonite, not Amish. I kinda thought that maybe he'd be more aware of wat goes on in the world. But maybe my assumption was mistaken.
There's a Mennonite community close to the small Okla town where I was born, and you see them as passers-by, but as a rule, they seem to keep to themselves, usually not even waving hello, and in small towns in Okla, it's rare for people not to wave as they pass by. I don't know much about their cultural habits. Do they avoid exposure to TV and radio as a rule? Just wondering.

[sqkcrk]

There was a radio playing when I delivered the honey.

[BoBn]

How do you know that? We don't even explore anymore as a general rule because it takes years to get past the EPA bureaucracy to even attempt production.

This is a great heaping pile of unmitigated BS.!!!
If you really want details on O&G exploration and who is sitting on untapped resources, you just need to do a bit of research. Go ahead and blame the EPA if you need a scape-goat.

-BoB

[beegee]

I'm reading Limits of Power right now. Good read, but I'm not sure if all of his theories are verifiable. I'd like to know more about Bacevich and his agendum. One thing is spot-on: no one is responsible for the mess we're in but us-the citizens. We've let government run rampant . We have failed to check American Empirialism.

Bacevich contends we are the result of our culture of excess, spawned by expansionism. Now that we are out of resources(effectively so, not in reality)and dependent on Middle East oil and Chinese goods to satisfy our lust for "more," which we confuse with liberty we try to conquer other realms bythe export of our so-called "ideals" to areas of the world which are for the most part disinterested in our reasons.

[dragonfly]

This is a great heaping pile of unmitigated BS.!!!
.

-BoB

Gee, what a response.:s

A friend of mine (not close friend, but more than an acquaintance) is a petroleum engineer. He works for an oil exploration company. Between the EPS regulations and environmentalists trying to shut attempts at oil production down, it takes years to 1) explore, 2) take care of the legal and environmental requirements, 3) get equipment and personnel in place, 4) produce. Companies can spend years in and out of court in addition to actual start-up time before they see actual production. The usual time frame is 7-10 years.

[Scrapfe]

Unless I've been missing something big here, I don't see the direct connection...The problem appears to be lifetime politicians...Over the past 50 or so years, the trend has been to increase the dependence of the population on the government...both sides seem...right in line with that idea.

If you got the time I got the tome for y'all to read, The Rise and the Fall of the Roman Empire The parallels with today's America are striking.