Surrender, Dorothy!
I’ve been thinking.
It’s been a hard year. Actually, it’s been pretty hard ever since Tuesday, November 6, 2012, when I realized the American people had re-elected Barack Obama and that now he was free to really implement that “change” we’d all been so fervently “hoping” for.
The political change I’ve undergone and then described on this blog wasn’t just a change from liberal to right. It was a change in the depth of my interest in the entire topic of politics, and that of history as well. Earlier in my life I’d read the newspaper regularly and kept myself fairly well informed, on the surface. But I had no particular interest in politics, and although I realized that politics affected me somewhat, I didn’t think it was of the utmost importance.
And in fact, back then the two parties weren’t as far apart as I now see them being. It didn’t seem so important to pay close attention. And politics was icky, nasty, stupid; both parties seemed petty, and I didn’t see many public figures to emulate or deeply admire.
Little did I know that was a relative golden age.
One funny thing—not funny ha-ha; funny strange—is that, as time has gone on and conservatives have griped about how there’s no difference between the two parties, I saw a greater and greater difference. There’s a huge difference in what they stand for, and even in tactics. Yes, yes of course the GOP often doesn’t stick to what it says it will do, and even if it sticks to it the tactic isn’t always successful. And yes, it seems that the Democrats are more unified and more ruthless in getting what they want, but you know one of the main reasons it’s that way? Because their task is much easier: they’re going in the direction of more power for themselves, not less, which is something politicians tend to like. And they’re going in the direction of making promises to give people stuff, and that’s something humans tend to like.
Now that we’ve got that cleared up—the conservative task is far harder—let me just say that there’s one way in which the two parties have gotten more similar, and that’s in how their constituents think about politics. Impatience and extremes. For example, lately I’ve seen a lot of this sort of argument from people on the right: the republic is dead, and cannot be revived, so it’s best to choose a tyrant from our side who’ll ride roughshod over many of the principles in which we believe—oh, like the rule of law—so that we can get things done. The ends justify the means.
I get that point of view, but I don’t share it, and I think it’s a dangerous, fatalist surrender to what you profess to hate.
The Parties, as you say, are more unalike than ever but that doesn’t preclude the very reality of their both being power hungry and both intrinsically corrupt.
various authors and historians, including Prof. Paul Gottfried, Prof. Claes Ryn, and Gary Dorrien (in his path-breaking volume, The Neoconservative Mind) have documented that the present-day “Mainstream Conservative Movement,” is, in fact, composed of power-seeking, self-congratulatory, and corrupt Neocon New York/DC elites, whose thin and venal intellectual fiber is the antithesis of an older, American conservatism.
“Trump is in part a reaction to the intellectual corruption of the Republican Party. That ought to be obvious to his critics, yet somehow it isn’t.”
— Tucker Carlson
Furthermore, in any conflict between two positions the position which is posited more certainly, with greater dedication, more resolutely, and has the greater commitment is the one that will most always win. The Lib/Prog/Left is winning. Islam is winning, Trump is winning. Ergo Trump is viewed as the strongest, most resolute candidate. If he is stopped it will be a global effort by globalists, i.e., Neo-conservatives, i.e., Cuckservatives, i.e., the most anti-democratic forces outside the Lib/Prog/Left. Far more anti-democratic than the wildest imaginings of the ABT (Anyone But Trump cabal, and the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) caucus.
What exactly does the GOP elite stand for? Is it accurate to posit that they stand for an American oligarchy? I certainly find that to be the case and, while I believe that to be preferable to the Left’s Marxism, in neither case can liberty flourish.
For without liberty, what do we really have worth living for?
Many on both sides are impatient but the underlying motivations could not be more different. On the left, the impatience is that the fundamental transformation hasn’t been finalized yet. On the right, it’s a case of when is someone going to do something concrete to stop this ‘runaway train’?
As for calls for a ‘Caesar’, never, I shall never bend the knee in submission to any man. Not to save my life, not even to save the lives of those I love. Some things are far worse than death, which sooner or later comes for us all.
Far better to die on our feet, than to exist on our knees.
Interesting observations Neo. I commented on a comment by someone named Waidmann in another thread in which he postulated that a dictatorship is coming, so we should push for our dictator. What a miserable attitude; but, it seems to have more traction that one would like.
Along those lines, I do not agree with JurassiCon at all. I still believe that at its core, the GOP believes in limited government and fiscal responsibility. The national politic is very complex; but, the principles are apparent in many state governments. I would say that if more Conservatives would actually work toward getting favored candidates elected, rather than bitching about the only party that is remotely interested in their issues, then the WH and the Congress might be allied at the national level as well.
I also do not agree with GB that the core motivation of the GOP is to promote Oligarchy. So much of the wealth disparity has come about in the past seven years to buy into that. It seems that an overwhelming percentage of the “new wealth”; i.e. in silicon valley is staunchly democratic. And they are wealthy because the public–including professed conservatives–cannot resist every new technology, or social media gimmick that they peddle. I do, of course, thoroughly agree with GB about bending the knee.
Knowledge is a burden.
Would you care to enumerate some of the reasons you see differences? I ask this because I’m firmly in the “2 sides of the same coin” mindset. The basis is that, while their tactics and promises may be diverging, what both sides actually do is effectively the same; more/bigger government, more spending, less privacy, less local control, less personal liberty.
I also do tend to be pessimistic as to the fate of the republic. It’s not dead yet, but inertia towards any reversal of course does not seem to exist whatsoever. Moreover, I don’t think it will exist until the degradation of civilzation starts to impose real impacts on everyday people who, today, do not appear to understand that our organized technological civilization is not just some happy accident. Only when the shelves begin to go empty, water doesn’t run, and it’s cold and dark, will they begin to honestly question what we had, and how we lost it. I despise this thought, but I don’t see a large cross-section of the population “getting wise” without some suffering to force their education.
“GOP believes in limited government and fiscal responsibility”
No doubt, they believe it. Like Harry Lime believed in God:
Holly: You used to believe in God.
Harry: Oh, I still do believe in God, old man. I believe in God and Mercy and all that. But the dead are happier dead. They don’t miss much here, poor devils.
It’s not what you believe. It’s not what you give lip service to. It’s not what you promise. It’s how you act that is the measure. The GOP preaches the gospel come election time and then idolizes power, lies, steals, kills, screws, and covets for the next forty-two months.
I have a 2 step formula in the event I am forced to vote for a vulgar authoritarian in the general election:
1) Hold nose.
2) Shower afterward.
It seems often in human history that a relative few civilized and rational people are swept along by tides of unsavory rabble. It has been our good fortune to live in a country founded by enlightened intellects. Given the contempt in which those enlightened are now viewed at most American colleges, our fortunes are declining.
We brace for the unpleasantness that seems sure to come.
Oldflyer recalled a comment :”postulated that a dictatorship is coming, so we should push for our dictator. What a miserable attitude;”
That is precisely why I have been calling Trump a Mussolini.
I’ve heard people, talk show hosts even, say “Yes, he’ll be a strongman, but at least he’ll be OUR strongman.”
Strongmen are ever only their own strongman.
That’s what makes them so.
The tide turned before the 2012 election. It began with the GOPe fighting the tea party movement, then turning a blind eye to the IRS persecution of the same movement, and finally coercing those same newly elected members to their side (Rubio). The subsequent anger allowed Trump to emerge. There is no good outcome in the short term, long term we keep fighting.
Yes Papa Dan, but the people complaining about establishment republicans going to Washington and not acting conservative are excited about sending a proven liberal to Washington who has NEVER acted conservative.
Amazing.
That is essentially what Ted Cruz stated on the Senate floor in his speech of September 28 2015 … where he not only pointed fingers at his own party but named names.
Neo:
“they’re going in the direction of more power for themselves, not less”
“Power” as in dominant control of the social political ecosystem is necessary to reify your preferred social political condition regardless of whether your want a more or less overbearing government because it’s a basic competitive requirement, not an ideological marker.
The practical solution for your dilemma is, of course, activism, the participatory political, democratic power of the people.
First, fix your structural premise. Distinguish conservatives of the Right from the GOP. Stop grouping the two together as the same competitive entity, as you do now.
Power is a bottom-line competitive necessity. Recognize and accept that acquiring sufficient power is necessary to acquire the dominant control that’s necessary to reify your preferred social political condition, whatever that is.
But since you want limited government, unlike your competitors, that means carefully allocating power to the politicians in government while retaining the wherewithal to hold politicians accountable to conservative principles, which means you need to concentrate the basically necessary power on a locus outside the politicians in government.
The practical solution is to distinguish conservatives from the GOP. Collectively organize conservatives as a competitive social activist movement to acquire the basically necessary power. Collect and concentrate the power on the Right, but mindfully, not on the GOP politicians you favor in government. Conservatives should establish and guard their role as principal outside of government, then apply the power they’ve acquired onto government, but not in government, with the GOP politicians serving as their agent in government.
Essentially, activism is the way to effectively restore the people’s check on government that the vote was supposed to be.
Oldflyer,
I would only ask you if the GOP leadership’s actions have been in support of limited government and fiscal responsibility?
It is to the GOP elite’s motivations as revealed by their actions or lack thereof, to which I reffered.
By the way, whatever is the fate of the Cruz candidacy, the one criticism I can make absolutely no sense of as emanating from supposed conservatives, is that he is too legalistic and lacks personal warmth and the ability to make an emotional connection with people who seek it.
I mean I understand the words they are using, and I suppose if I were convinced he were some kind of reptile disguised as a man, or an outright misanthropist, I’d be alarmed.
But that does not seem to be what they are saying. The sons of miscreants are acting as if they prefer an emotional connection with their “leader” to a rule of law regime.
It comes as a surprise to me that the rule of law principle is even seen as in some way suspect, or as part of a particularly conservative ideology.
What is this? The triumph of a new kind of emotion based antinomiansm?
You either endorse the rule of law, or you don’t. And if the law does not apply to Obama or Trump, there is damn little reason for anyone else to have any regard for it, outside of anticipating what might happen to them if they are unlucky enough to be singled out and caught.
And in that case, there is only the illusion of fellow citizens – we are all actually enemies with whom we are playing a game that centers on who will be fed to the shark last.
Possibly that is why Cruz is not drawing as many Evangelical votes as expected. Possibly a significant number of Evangelicals are not quite in it for what most people assumed they were.
Simply well said.
Meanwhile:
Trump hits another one out of the park:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump told the New York Times he would consider stopping U.S. oil purchases from Saudi Arabia unless the Saudi government provide troops to fight Islamic State….
DNW:
Thank you for reminding some of the actions that Cruz has taken. Inconvenient speaking truth to those is power. I guess it didn’t seal the deal with the establishment. Maybe he should have spread some donations around?
@I won’t submit Says: Do you really think forcing the Sauds to remove the dollar as the de facto world currency (and guarantor for our debt) is a good thing?
Insightful Neo, but there’s a difference between federal politics and state. Federal politicians are never called to account for the money they
spendprint. State politicians have to be efficient and effective with their dollars while keeping tax burdens stable and budgets balanced. There’s more realism there, and state electorates tend to reward realism..
Take Wisconsin for example; it has a vast, highly motivated, ruthless and malicious left, but the center-left electorate prefers the GOP’s financial stability. I seriously wonder if the Trumpkin tea leaves are telling conservatives to stop participating in the federal mess. Let it be that only democrats are on hand to be responsible. And let an alternative of prudent governance be on display in states run by the GOP.
DNW, I recently read a very thoughtful blog post making the case that we don’t vote for what we believe in, we vote for what we love.
The point the author was making was that in regards to evangelicals, specifically, if you love comfort and country more than you love God and principle..then you would naturally be more drawn to Trump than Cruz.
DNW,
No leader has ever inspired a willingness to, “march into hell” if asked, through an intellectual argument. Politics is not about intellectual ‘positions’, it’s about beliefs that inspire allegiance. And allegiance rests in the heart.
Because Ted Cruz’s actions are congruent with beliefs to which I hold dear (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech and religion, etc.) Cruz has gained my allegiance.
The way that Ted Cruz can make an emotional connection with voters is to talk about what he believes in, rather than intellectual disections of his opponents positions.
The majority of the public doesn’t want an intellectual debate, they want someone to believe in, someone whose sincerity inspires trust.
Trust resides in the heart.
I won’t submit,
That’s just f*cking brilliant!
1) We stop buying from the major OPEC producer
2) Because oil is fungible, we’ll have to stop buying from other OPEC producers, or the whole system is a fraud.
3) We base all our consumption on US shale production
4) This in effect turns US oil production into a state-run enterprise, giving even more power to D.C. and increasing the corruption and cronyism.
Trump is a f*cking genius!
Ed Bonderenka Says:
March 26th, 2016 at 8:35 pm
@I won’t submit Says: Do you really think forcing the Sauds to remove the dollar as the de facto world currency (and guarantor for our debt) is a good thing?
Yes!
What it is you don’t understand about my screen name?
LJB,
There are two ways of looking at that. Either the Evangelicals love God too little (as you’re implying) or love him too much (as I think DNW was implying). He may be saying that they’re trying to bring on the endtimes?
The US dollar can NOT be dislodged from its premier status as the international reserve currency.
That status comes automatically by way of being BY FAR the biggest dog on the block.
And, yes, this hugely frustrates Beijing and Moscow.
They’ve got their ‘best men’ on it — and can’t crack the dollar.
&&&&&
Trump — or Cruz — ought to slap a tarriff on OPEC crude.
1) To save our economy. ( bond market, banking sector )
2) To save our oil production industry.
3) To cripple the economic power of oil exporters… virtually all hostile powers.
( Notable exceptions: Canada and Mexico. )
&&
KSA can’t really send any meaningful manpower.
The better position is that KSA take in migrants, Sunni migrants.
Matt:
“Love God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself.” Not an easy thing for fallen creatures to do. The idea that man’s actions can hasten or delay the end times is pretty laughable for this Christian. Some Shia and Sunni Moslems (ISIS and Iranians) seem to practice that belief for their “God,” in regards the 12th Imam for example with the Shia and the a theological statements of ISIS.
Umm, I was just going to respond that as I understand it, trying to “bring on” the end times would be counter to the core Evangelical perspective that “God is in control and His timing is perfect”. Unlike the Islamic counter belief that it’s somehow up to man to “get this party started”. So, yes, I would say the author’s point was that most American Evangelicals have taken their eye off the ball – which is to love God above all, including country. But then I saw that OM beat me to it. 🙂
This is the blog post I was citing, btw:
http://tcpca.org/2016/03/17/in-love-with-donald-trump/
I can’t really get too interested in this election, because I cannot foresee a favorable outcome. Sanders and Hillary cannot be imagined as effective leaders when military action becomes necessary, and both favor every PC absurdity that I despise. Both Trump and Cruz will have protestors in the streets immediately, no matter what they do.
I have my incurable, progressive disease to worry about, though “worry about” is not really descriptive of how things may go. I have my art, as a “cult author” who actually has some prospects now…. so we’ll see. I don’t say anything remotely political to anyone I know. They can accept that I’m a little more hyped on events overseas than they are because I was married to someone from Avignon and almost ended up moving to France.
Some of the difference I see is explained by people who are wed to these conservative rules for their own sake; they’re beautiful rules and we must adhere to them. Others see that those rules are what allows humans to flourish.
The first group will punish everyone if their rules are not endorsed unanimously. They must pay! The second group realizes that not following those rules is its own punishment. It’s misanthrophy vs. empathy.
Also see Kevin Williamson’s Resentment Republicans vs. Aspirational.
I will not submit writes: “Yes!
What it is you don’t understand about my screen name?”
Even with fracking etc the US is nowhere near producing enough oil for our demand. Do you volunteer to stop driving your car, heating or cooling your home, or use products shipped to the stores in trucks, all of which use Saudi oil or its fungible equivalent in the world oil market?
If you do, all I have to say is first you my friend.
“Trust resides in the heart.”
For me GB, trust comes from the instinctual center, aka hara. Mushin no shin. (Google it!) 🙂 It is what makes a well trained and disciplined man/woman superior before a blow hard, aka Trump. Understanding basic principles does not necessarily win at the ballot box, but it does provide a superior attitude that is not an attitude. I wish I could coach Cruz, but understanding takes time and surrender to reality.
1) It’s looking increasingly likely that Trump will NOT be able to get the nomination on the first ballot.
2) Once their commitment to Trump is past — most of the delegates are going to default to not-Trump.
BECAUSE.
Trump is not a Republican, just as Sanders is not a Democrat.
If they fall away from the Donald, then, by the rules, the only candidate left standing would be Ted Cruz.
This is very apparently, where Cruz sees a path to the nomination.
I dunno, Blert. I agree that it’d be tough tor Trump to have 1237 assigned delegates at the end of the primaries. But then he’s got a month and a half before the convention. He’s not just going to be using that time making the case that a plurality is enough; he’s going to be making deals to get to a majority.
This’ll be the time for Ted Cruz to swallow his pride, throw away his principles, and put a Mitch McConnell on the ticket. Every undecided delegate gets a new highway or a post office. Their kids get Capitol Hill internships. Anyone want a VA hospital named after their dad? “Statehood for the Northern Marianas!”
A good candidate brings in expertise that he’s lacking. Cruz has no natural skill at buttering up pols and using the national trust as a slush fund. This is Trump’s wheelhouse.
In that regard, maybe the closest comparison to Trump is Bill Clinton. He’s a principle-free charmer who wants to be president because he thinks it looks fun. He’d have the biggest stage in the world. When you’ve got everything you could want, the only thing that can hold your interest is getting as close as you can to catastrophe, just to see if you can pull off a win.
The big difference, I suspect, is in how they lie. Bill Clinton believed every word he ever spoke at the moment he was saying it. Donald Trump has never considered whether something is true before he says it.
One last comment on the theme: I should note that Hillary Clinton lies like Barack Obama. There’s no natural enthusiasm in their lies. They’re both just irritated that they have to deal with people before they can get the power that only they are smart enough to deserve.
OK, I’m definitely going to shut up after this. Bill and Donald are “I want this”. Hillary and Barack are “I deserve this”. I don’t know about Ted, but he comes off more as the latter. Maybe he’s “everyone but me keeps messing this up.”
Bob_CA Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 12:21 am
Even with fracking etc the US is nowhere near producing enough oil for our demand…
If you do, all I have to say is first you my friend.
Too simplistic in your thinking. Key words are fungible & fracking. There is plenty of oil.
The US has been exporting all of a sudden.
The shortages are artificial, onerous political drilling restrictions, etc…
Fracking was a galloping technology bolt out of nowhere. Wlam!
No one, including industry insiders fully saw it coming.
The vile Libtards in our midst panicked at the effects.
As to “first you my friend” again, too simplistic.
You adapt your behaviors, methods and processes according to costs, no problems.
As it is, plenty of frivolous car trips for no particularly pressing reasons…
Don’t be simplistic “my friend”…
Matt_SE Says:
March 26th, 2016 at 9:43 pm
Hmm … yes, the whole OPEC system is a fraud.
4) This in effect turns US oil production into a state-run enterprise, giving even more power to D.C. and increasing the corruption and cronyism.
Wait what? No idea what you’re talking about.
TDS like BDS before rots the brain.
Strangely there was no noticeable Obambi Derangement syndrome … Obamaniacs are acceptable it seems.
Read blert‘s posts. blert has it right.
I won’t:
Fracking is more expensive than Saudi conventional oil by far but much less expensive than deep water and Arctic offshore oil. It was booming in North Dakota three years ago not so much now.
I was there learning how to be a directional driller. “Been there done that,” it was a very interesting, challenging job.
But it’s mostly economics. Someone has to be willing, or forced, to pay the higher price for shale oil. Coercion in economic systems doesn’t work long term.
Blert probably has more data on this than I.
Bringing up the Saudis problem is another of the invaluable contributions Trump’s genius has made in dissolving the Libtard generated PC brain fog.
The Saudis are one of the hidden malignant tumor, slowly but mightily endeavoring to take us all down.
Well documented: example book
Robert Baer’s Sleeping with the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude
We have problems. Likely neither Trump nor Cruz are proper leaders for what is coming in the near future, for different reasons.
The GOP is committing suicide because it does NOTHING to bring government-based malefactors to justice… the Republican “leaders” don´t even mention these crimes, let alone seek justice for their wronged constituents.
This has lead to the rise of Trump. His supporters perceive him to be outside both political parties.
To paraphrase Mark Steyn, if legitimate politicians WON´T address the voters´ issues, the voters will turn to illegitimate politicians.
None of this would have been if the good guys had gotten into the Libtards’ faces…
Instead they chose, CHOSE, to be meek, attend their parties and passively, bovinely, chew on crudités, canapés and hors d’oeuvres. [pronounced the American English way]
Burp!
OM Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 11:24 am
But it’s mostly economics. Someone has to be willing, or forced, to pay the higher price for shale oil. Coercion in economic systems doesn’t work long term.
Yes. Fracking emerged as prices rose. Yankee ingenuity.
Posting on blogs is a terse medium. I decided not to elaborate.
Always read blert’s and artfldgr’s
posts ….
OM Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 11:24 am
I won’t:
Fracking is more expensive than Saudi conventional oil by far but much less expensive than deep water and Arctic offshore oil. It was booming in North Dakota three years ago not so much now.
&&&&&&
You have to look at the numbers — recognizing that Saudi Arabia HAS TO spend fantastic sums on the general public — come what may.
PERIOD.
The kingdom actually needs to receive $80/ bbl or more to cover its direct expenses AND its social ‘nut.’
American frackers have NO social ‘nut’ to carry — whatsoever.
They can survive — forever — with crude at $65l bbl.
Some strata is so prolific that even $ 35/ bbl is tolerable.
The key thing with fracking is that the output sells for TOP dollar… it’s invariably sweet and light. ( the only kind of oil that can flow in tight sands )
&&&&
KSA is at WAR — economic war — and its real targets are not American frackers — never were — never could be.
Their primary targets are Russia and Iran. Duh.
But, that reality can’t be acknowledged. Duh.
&&&&&
KSA is displacing Russian natural gas exports.
In the technical press, the Saudis openly admitted that they wanted to export middle distillates to Eastern Europe — and Ukraine.
They built a world scale refinery at Yanbu. 400,000 bbl/ day.
Ukraine, last I read, was cut off by Putin WRT natural gas deliveries. ( unpaid bills )
At current prices, Saudi middle distillates are cheaper than the old rate for Russian natural gas.
The West has given Kiev a wad of cash to tide them over.
Putin ‘gets the picture’ — and is steaming.
The Saudi induced pain has caused the Russian economy to contract — and its currency to fall.
Barry Soetoro is propping him up by giving funds to Tehran — that will quickly be spent on Russian weapons.
( Russia is in trouble with New Delhi… as their 5th generation fighter has been rejected as hopelessly uncompetitive with the F-22 by the Indians. Putin had been expecting the Indians to fund the entire project. !!! )
&&&&&&
KSA is bleeding down its war chest at current prices.
It’s been forced to liquidate plenty of financial assets — hence the weak opening this January on Wall Street.
Everything is going the wrong way for KSA and Russia.
Right behind them is Red China — also liquidating US Treasurys at a clip.
parker,
Forty years ago, in my late 20’s, when I was still active in the martial arts, I experienced a few, brief moments of Mushin. IMO, that is not where trust resides. What confirms for me that trust resides in the heart is the utter trust that little children express with those whom they know deeply love them. They know not of Mushin, which is a learned skill, to ’empty’ the mind, while retaining total alertness.
“Suffer little children and forbid them not, to come on to me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven”.
blert,
It’s my understanding that American fracking had so flooded the world market with excess oil that it was driving world oil prices so low that the Saudis decided, as a matter of survival (that social nut), to fully open their oil spigot and inundate the market with so much oil that it will lower the price so low that it will destroy the American fracking industry.
Survival, rather than competitive concerns with Russia and Iran is the KSA’s primary motivation.
Blert:
The problem is that $65 bl hasn’t been around for a while (more than a year I think), and many firms are going bankrupt in the oil patch now. Rig counts are way down and efficiencies in production methods are harder to come by. So while the Saudi’s have a large dependent class that is sucking them dry they (KSA) still wants to kill the shale oil business in the US. And then there are the US EPA and other agencies working to increase costs (methane emissions, water use issues) and eliminate fracking on Federal lands.
Also there are a lot of wells that have been drilled, but are capped, and not fracked in ND. These wells can come into production relatively quickly, if the price gets high enough, but not so many wells being drilled except in proven low risk parts of the Bakken (ND). I can’t speak for Texas, but in ND the production zone is a 10-15 ft-thick carbonate (packstone).
Geoffrey Britain Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 5:16 pm
Strangely, that concept is far away from market realities.
1) Fracking impacted Nigeria not KSA.
2) KSA’s exports to America are heavy, sour crudes. They trade at a substantial discount to the benchmark grades… all of which are light, sweet grades.
Libya’s crude trades at the top of the market. It scarcely requires refining. A simple distilling column is sufficient.
This primitive level of processing is typical of small European markets — like Ireland — which was getting all its crude from Libya at one point. ( IIRC, it only had one refinery. )
3) While Crude oil exports from America had been prohibited by Congress — that did not stop refined exports from swamping the European market.
Yep. Countless European refiners have gone under. American middle distillates and gasoline ruined their ‘crack spreads.’
( Refinery talk for the profits made by the refining process.)
4) Because the Saudi exports to the Gulf Coast are sold at a discount — a big one — those refineries NEVER had any intent to use fracked crude.
If they were to process anything — it would be the syn-crude coming down from Canada. Why ?
The Keystone pipeline would, uniquely, be pumping very heavy, sour — scarcely processed — syncrude all the way to the Gulf Coast. The southern branches for this link up already exist. So the only issue up for debate was way up north.
Need I say it ? The Saudis were — far and away — the number one funder of the “Greens” to fight off Keystone. Heh.
They could see that once THAT deal was hooked up, they would lose the Gulf market — forever.
The Canadians intended to scale up syncrude to completely displace Saudi imports.
&&&&&&
From where Riyadh sits, Iran and Russia are FAR mare important than frackers.
&&&&
Fracking down in Texas is so rewarding that industry wags now estimate that many of the biggest ‘plays’ can pencil out at $40 / bbl.
That’s HALF the price the royals need to keep their system going. At this time, they are breaking the piggy bank to fight this economic war.
Restated, the Saudis are losing far, far, far more money than the American frackers.
They hope that their wallet can hold out. It’s not looking good for them.
Let’s have a palate cleanser: Christopher Hitchens being scathing about Hillary Clinton:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE8PG2mpo58
blert Says: the Saudis are losing far, far, far more money than the American frackers.
true,and they are ruining their wells because if they keep pumping faster than the well flow, water gets into the wells…
but the saudies own the wells as family, and can look at finances as a family whole over decades. while the companies in the usa can only look at it as regular business wiht loans and things that can shut them down, but will intead cause consolidation.
the major difference between their oil and other sources is that theirs is light and pumps itself out of the ground rather than needing complicated pumps and fracking (which has almost been around the oil business not long after the start when it sought to replace whale oil with kerosene, then wanted a use for a waste product called gasoline)
The point is not about the details of oil supply it is the fact that the idiot Trump throws out statements like the US will stop buying oil from the Saudis without any thought whatsoever about the subtleties discussed here. He is such a megalomaniac narcissist that he thinks that he will force them to do what he wants by the force of his personality. He is totally ignorant about the oil economy and does not care that he is ignorant. Then the Trumpers here like “submit” think this is brilliant. Trump mania is a mental disorder.
No, you’re giving me too much credit. I pretty much meant the more superficial interpretation LJB mentioned.
My guess is that Evangelicals are not as uniform a group in their sensibilities moral and otherwise as some might imagine, and I am sure that a great number of Evangelical pastors would be happy to say that to my face.
I know that , having been informed – as I have admitted here before – of just that by an Evangelical pastor; i.e., lots of folks join Evangelical churches for reasons other than the core Gospel message and the theological doctrines associated with Evangelical or traditional Baptist churches.
Now I was not planning on joining. But he looked me in the eye when he more or less observed that: “We pastors occasionally see men here who having hit 30, decided they might as well settle down. But they want a woman who is both good looking and relatively unspoiled. And in thus changing their usual dating habits, find themselves dragged to an occasional service here by these girlfriends who are members of our congregation. After he marries her we never see him again. We call that being ‘unequally yoked’ ”
Ahem …
But among those who do spend time in the Evangelical churches, I suspect that there is the same variety of social motives we used to see attributed to almost all other institutions through which some temporal reward for membership can be derived.
DNW said:
No, you’re giving me too much credit. I pretty much meant the more superficial interpretation LJB mentioned.
LOL
It’s an interesting thought nonetheless, but probably far-fetched. It’s true that there were moments and movements of such Millennialism fervor in America’s past, but I doubt that’s the case today.
Bob_CA said:
Then the Trumpers here like “submit” think this is brilliant. Trump mania is a mental disorder.
+1000
This is the same 3D chess bullshit we heard about Obama, only with an extra heaping of sanctimony because we “just weren’t smart enough to understand what he was doing.”
Nick Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 9:04 am
…
This’ll be the time for Ted Cruz to swallow his pride, throw away his principles, and put a Mitch McConnell on the ticket. Every undecided delegate gets a new highway or a post office. Their kids get Capitol Hill internships. Anyone want a VA hospital named after their dad? “Statehood for the Northern Marianas!”
A good candidate brings in expertise that he’s lacking. Cruz has no natural skill at buttering up pols and using the national trust as a slush fund. This is Trump’s wheelhouse.
* * *
Cruz is already sliding into the “RINO” camp with his recent endorsers; this would seal the deal for Trump.
(Beg pardon if you are sarc’ing us here, Nick.)
I won’t submit Says:
March 27th, 2016 at 11:58 am
“To paraphrase Mark Steyn, if legitimate politicians WON´T address the voters´ issues, the voters will turn to illegitimate politicians.”
– indeed; this is part, if not most, of the source of Trump’s rise.
In the extreme (addressing neo’s posts on moderate Muslim, or the apparent lack thereof): if politicians won’t address reasonable defenses against jihadi terrorists, their constituents will start imposing (what the politicians consider to be) unreasonable ones.
Artfldgrs Says:
March 28th, 2016 at 8:58 am
blert Says: the Saudis are losing far, far, far more money than the American frackers.
true,and they are ruining their wells because if they keep pumping faster than the well flow, water gets into the wells…
but the saudies own the wells as family, and can look at finances as a family whole over decades. while the companies in the usa can only look at it as regular business wiht loans and things that can shut them down, but will intead cause consolidation.
the major difference between their oil and other sources is that theirs is light and pumps itself out of the ground rather than needing complicated pumps and fracking (which has almost been around the oil business not long after the start when it sought to replace whale oil with kerosene, then wanted a use for a waste product called gasoline)
&&&&&&
You are decades out of date, my friend.
The Saudis have largely run out of light, sweet crude.
They’ve long ago pumped it and sold it.
The Yanbu middle distillate refinery was built EXACTLY because of this reality.
As far back as forty-years ago, ARAMCO was pressuring the four founders to take more heavy, sour crude.
At this time, and for some years now, America has been purchasing nothing but the heavy, sour crude from KSA.
And at a DISCOUNT.
Entire, world-scale, refineries have been built// modified to accept that feed. ( They are all on the Gulf Coast and the LOOP figures huge in their operations. )
Louisiana Offshore Oil Port ( Platform )
The VLCC transit from Yanbu to LOOP over and over.
Yanbu is on the Red Sea, and is immune to Iran… mostly.
The dust up in Yemen is a DIRECT threat to Yanbu’s shipments.
Yanbu has supplanted Ras Tanura as KSA’s most critical oil export terminal.
1) Deeper water
2) Away from Iran
3) Suitable for ULCC that head off towards Japan, China and Korea
I might add that KSA keeps adding additional pipeline links — all terminating at Yanbu — doing everything possible to eliminate the Strait of Hormuz from the strategic picture.