Al, your punditry would be more respectable if it wasn't being broadcast from a GayBar, GayBar!

You took us there, and it was a GayBar!

"I see no sign that the American public wants to turn Bush out because gas prices are too high at the pump. They're not that stupid."

You're right - but his stupid energy policy is another matter.

Cutting back on funding for research into alternative energy sources, for instance, was not too bright, especially with the situation in the Middle East as it is today.

Basically there is no such thing as too much research - I agree this should be a funding priority. Funding research is one of the few areas where government spending is unambiguously profitable.

Hmmm, statements like this

Yes, I was just wrong in my guess that gas prices would be coming down, but so what?

don't exactly inspire confidence in the level of analysis. Seems to me if your assumptions don't lead to accurate predictions, you're supposed to question the assumptions. But then, what would a pinko like me know about empiricism?

Gawd forbid we actually conserve our finite resources.

Or develop some that AREN'T finite.

What does Bush have to say about those?

~chirp~chirp~chirp~vroooom

sound of crickets being mowed down by Hummer II)

PS: If Bush were serious about 'protecting' America's future, he'd start a "Manhattan Project" for alternative energy.

PPS: Big Al, we'll talk when the oil companies report their profits over the next few quaters. Any guesses as to how many hundred percent they'll increase?

I don't know what oil company profits are going to be, but even before gas prices here in California had gotten to the $2.10+/gallon they're at, the oil company take had jumped from 25 cents/gallon to 72 cents/gallon.

Surely there is some other reason than profiteering for that, right?

Geez, where's a PR flake when you need one?

JR, I'm perfectly willing to question my own assumptions and conclusions. I would NEVER have supported the war on the basis of how it would or would not affect gas prices, however. I said also before the war that it COULD jack up prices. The net effect seems to have been largely neutral so far, though. In any case, I've never claimed omniscience.

My thought at the time was that most likely the elimination of Hussein and the embargoes on his regime would result in a big increase in production, exerting downward pressure on prices from a non-OPEC country. That hasn't happened so far, but it might just be that it takes two years instead of one. Or it might never happen.

Plus, there are a lot more factors determining gas prices than our actions in Iraq- fluctuations in the whole world economy, oil labor disputes in Argentina, etc. I would not begin to claim expertise in world oil markets.

In any case, I'd have supported the war even if gas were now $3 a gallon. The point was not to get cheap gas, but to stop evil killers.

By the way, from my market oriented perspective, the incentive of high prices for energy would be a better prompt for actual market-justified private investment in conservation and alternative fuel technologies rather than the arbitrary whim of Congress. Public sector stuff is so TOTALLY politicized as to be highly suspect.

This is just EXACTLY the kind of thing that constitutes the evil "corporate welfare" that liberals, libertarians and conservatives all alike should be HIGHLY skeptical of.

On the other hand, if energy prices are going up, natural incentives to invest in insulating your house go up. Incentives to carpool or drive smaller cars go up. Incentives to invest in alternative energy sources go up. In all this, we get the full proven benefits of a market economy in directing the best, most promising and efficient investments.

Finally, what's the deal with the GayBar, Carruthers? Is this your way of asking for a date?

excellent analysis Al. A little energy crisis is far more likely to get us those water powered cars through market justified private investment than tax dollars thrown down the rat-hole of governmental research bureaucracy.

Anyway, this just sounds like more anti-bushy whining. Unless you drive for a living, the ordinary consumer is not being put out by high gas prices. If you're worried about oil company profits, buy oil stocks.

Carve-up of oil riches begins
Sunday November 3, 2002( note date)
The Observer

"The leader( should we say Bush buddy and con-man covicted of fraud in Jordan) of the London-based Iraqi National Congress, Ahmed Chalabi, has met executives of three US oil multinationals to negotiate the carve-up of Iraq's massive oil reserves post-Saddam.

Disclosure of the meetings in October in Washington - confirmed by an INC spokesman - comes as Lord Browne, the head of BP, has warned that British oil companies have been squeezed out of post-war Iraq even before the first shot has been fired in any US-led land invasion.

Confirming the meetings to US journalists, INC spokesman Zaab Sethna said: 'The oil people are naturally nervous. We've had discussions with them, but they're not in the habit of going around talking about them."
.....Part of BushCo's motivation probably was oil, it just didn't work out as planned. After all, remember that Paul Wolfowitz said that the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be paid for with Iraqi oil revenue, U.S. tax payers are still waiting. Could it be that like everything else that the neo-cons have told us, it's just part of the imcompetence and web of lies.
rest of oil article here. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4538509-102274,00.html

oh, c'non, it's not about oil or drink, it's about Al hanging about in a gaybar. A Gaybar!

I figure I can only do my part by linking in google Al Barger and Gay Bar. Please do your part to link Al Barger and gay bar.

Because he do like the gay bar.

And why has there been no investigation on Al Barger and Electric Six and Gay Bar, and the link between Al Barger and electric six and gay bar?

the end of the oil age is an intersting time

Yeah, what's baffling about the end of the oil age is that so few people seem to care. Conservatives--who seem to think of themselves (bafflingly, and in the face of overwhelming evidence) as somehow more moral that liberals are content to use up every last drop of one of the world's most precious resources. Handing a world without oil to future generations will rank as one of the great acts of generational selfishness of all time. And to add injury to injury, we're not just using it all up, but sending the greenhouse gasses and other pollutants into the atmosphere... Jebus.

So Jim, your whole point is to point some google thing to say I'm homosexual by planting my name and the word "gay" together?

Of course you realize that every time you do this, you're attaching your OWN name to it just as close.

Why would Jim do that? Is it a graceless way to antagonize Al. Does it show that Jim Carruthers has contempt for gays? Does Jim want to go out with Al?

BEARS REPEATING: Handing a world without oil to future generations will rank as one of the great acts of generational selfishness of all time. -- Winston Smith

Dan: "A little energy crisis is far more likely to get us those water powered cars"

Could you clarify what sort of cars you meant?

I see BMW and General Motors advertising their goal of hydrogen-powered cars, but hydrogen is not an energy source. Running cars on hydrogen with increase the use of fossil fuels and pollution.

I've posted some info under The Myth of the Hydrogen Economy.

(a) I guess that Al Barger/gay bar biz is intended as a joke, but I find it kinda irritating. Even though I'm neither gay nor Al...

(b) At the risk of sounding like a Hal dittohead--he's right. Hydrogen isn't an energy source.

(c) Um, and (re: (b)) am I the only one who's a little suspicious about the fact that Bush is promoting a gigantic new type of energy technology that will almost certainly end up controlled by and making profits for the oil industry? And doing this against the advice of scientists (as usual)? And doing this instead of raising gas mileage, which would lower oil industry profits? (And which is what scientists suggest.)

Winston, note that your point C goes exactly to the point I was making about government directed research, and the inherently political nature of such things.

Al: "Public sector stuff is so TOTALLY politicized as to be highly suspect."

Possibly, but it's PRIVATELY-funded research that is not just suspect but proven to be shaded, faded, mangled and munged (not to mention suppressed) to support the funding-corporations' desires.

The tobacco and drug industries spring to mind as prime examples.

Perhaps so Hal, to some extent- as to research to prove that some company isn't to blame for something. I'm not suggesting that we just take the tobacco companies' word as to the harmful effects of their products.

However, as to R&D to actually develop new products, private companies spending their own money are far better incentivized to actually find the things that will work, and produce usable products and treatments for consumers than any government agency.

But the government research is what really advances frontiers since they are not driven by the profit motive. Private companies go after what will make the most money soonest (roughly).

A good example of this working well is the research funded through NIH. They spread grants to various labs (universities usually) to study things that have no immediate benefit. The result is the most of today's best-selling drugs got their start with government funds.

DARPA is another (See the browser? See it running on the Internet?)

I'd rather see tax dollars spent this way rather than building a new shipyard in Trent Lott's home state at a time when the US is not competitive in ship-building. Or subsidizing Archers-Daniels-Midland, whose slogan was "Our competitor is our friend, our customer is our enemy" and helping them to put millions of third-world farmers out of business while keeping our food costs higher than they would otherwise be.

This is one area where government can do a great deal of good.

Actually the whole Al Barger in a gaybar thing is an out-take from "Cabin Fever" where the biting kid, Dennis does a kung-fu routine to Electric Six "Gay Bar". Plus, the idea of Al in a gay bar, getting shot down all night is just funny.

And also, just using the song as a soundtrack to all of Al's postings just makes them readable. C'mon, just cycle "in a gay bar! a gay bar!" while reading his stuff, and it just goes down so smooth, and is 75 per cent more funny.

"I see no sign that the American public wants to turn Bush out because gas prices are too high at the pump. They're not that stupid. If part of the cost of stopping terrorists from KILLING US is that we pay a little more for gas at the pump, then so be it. There are lots of good reasons to crappy about Bush, but gas prices aren't among them."

I have been a loyal republican all my life and will continue to be a republican in my heart, but I will not vote for a president that allows the oil producing nations to take such shameful advantage of the american people. I will not vote for Kerry, but I will not vote for Bush either unless this is put to rest and QUICKLY!

If you think a president can win an election over a war that grows more unpopular all the time (for the record, I do support the war) and the price of eggs, milk and gasoline continue to rise, then you are entitled to your opinion. But I won't vote for him.

1.