To prove the Knish’s point, one needs only to look at Obama’s appalling first term and yet the poseur was re-elected. Good economy, bad economy, foreign policy triumphs, foreign policy disasters – it does not matter if you are a Democrat. Right now (and it can change) I think that Hillary Clinton if she wants it will win the presidency in 2016 despite the fact she looks awful.
by Daniel Greenfield
On Friday, Hillary Rodham Clinton left the Harry S. Truman Building of the State Department after doing a grand media tour of every media outlet with a camera and a microphone. Meanwhile in Benghazi, where it was twenty degrees warmer, foreign organizations were fleeing the city while the killers who stayed behind still walked the streets.
In her joint appearance with Obama on 60 Minutes, Clinton claimed that her critics were not living in an “evidence-based world”. This is the same world of which she wrote in her goodbye letter to her State Department colleagues; “I am proud of what we have accomplished together.” Those accomplishments are hard to find among the debris of three failed wars, two failed containment policies in Iran and North Korea, and more attacks on American diplomatic facilities than ever before.
Hillary Clinton presided over the first murder of an American ambassador in thirty years. It was the closest thing to a notable moment in her time as Secretary of State, which concluded, in true Clinton style, with a cover-up, Senate hearings and more finger-wagging.
And yet, despite all that, the media threw her a farewell party in preparation for the 2016 election. Four Americans died in Benghazi and in four years, Hillary Rodham Clinton expects to take the White House.
There is a certain symmetry to that. A year of political exile for every man she left unguarded and unsupported while lavishing millions on mosque renovations, embassy paintings and assorted trinkets. A year for every man whose blood was spilled on the warm streets of Benghazi. Four dead men and four years in which to prepare to do the same thing all over again as President of the United States.
[.........]
The Benghazi attackers came out of Al Qaeda in Iraq; an organization that is showing more staying power than General Motors, and like the maker of the Aztek, it’s spending a lot of time and energy expanding internationally.
When Obama turned his back on Iraq, discarding the sacrifices of the Surge, like he did the lives of the four men murdered in Benghazi, the terror didn’t stop. Al Qaeda bombs have kept going off as Iraq melted down into a conflict between its Iranian-backed Shiite government, the Kurds and Sunni Islamists. And Al Qaeda found new wars. Like a persistent suitor, it followed BHO and HRC to Benghazi.
[.........]
Like Hillary, Obama has never been held accountable for any of it. And Hillary’s very lack of accountability, her immunity from accountability makes her eminently qualified for the top spot in a Democratic Party where it’s more important to know how to shrug off accountability than it is to get things right.
Bill Clinton ushered in the post-accountability era, where evidence no longer mattered and the law was something that you could ignore if you felt like it. It is the thing that Obama, Clinton 2 and Biden all have in common. They are the poster-children of the post-accountability era where the synergy of media and party is so complete that it no longer matters what you do; only which side you’re on.
Jimmy Carter, the man under whose administration the last American ambassador was murdered, was also the last Democratic president to be held accountable for anything. [.........]
Looking back on the last two decades, it almost seems as if the Clinton era never ended. Not only are both Clintons on television all the time, but so is Al Gore, still playing the guru in a suit, the deep thinker with a hand out to foreign governments. In the Clinton era, it was Communist China. Today it’s Islamist Qatar. At the time Gore said that he had done nothing wrong because there was no controlling legal authority. There still isn’t. Not where Democrats are concerned.
Al Gore, whose palm always itches for money from the enemies of the United States, nearly made it to the White House, where his influence peddling would have taken place on a whole other scale. Clinton, who did make it, deported a little boy to a Communist country at gunpoint and murdered more children at Waco, in the world’s bloodiest training exercise.
But again no one was held responsible. It’s a long way from Benghazi to Waco, but the Clintons retain their talent for walking over corpses to reach their ambition. And their critics, who notice the bodies, are accused of harboring personal vendettas and of not living in an “evidence-based world.”
The Democratic Party in the last two decades has absorbed Bill Clinton’s ability to avoid accountability. The ranks of its congressmen are full of liars, felons and lunatics. It is a party so devoid of accountability that the likes of Sheila Jackson Lee can sit on the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics without being able to tell apart the Moon and Mars, while Hank Johnson can warn that Guam may tip over if too many Marines land on it.
The Party of Jefferson has made the long sad trip to a party that views Massachusetts scandal machines like Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank as elder statesmen, instead of criminals who were never locked up, on account of their political influence. And it is full of these elder statesmen, men like Joe Biden, whose only gift is an inability to shut up and a media unwilling to condemn even the worst of their shenanigans.
The only remaining virtue in the Democratic Party is shamelessness. Those Democrats who have no shame prosper, those who do turn themselves in and serve their time.
After having trashed the housing market, the likes of Barack Obama and Andrew Cuomo step forward as reformers. After having murdered a woman, Ted Kennedy retired as a champion of women’s rights. [........] And four years from now, Hillary Clinton will be touting her experience in Benghazi as a reason that she should be elected to the White House where she will be able to do it all over again.
Read the rest – Things only a Democrat could get away with
Tags: Daniel Greenfield, Sultan Knish
And the quasi conservatives find every way possible to get rid of those not toeing the party line.
Christians..STFU-STFD
TEA Party…Destroying the right, destroy them
Values, morals, principles…we want no part of that archaic system of life
Say hello to President Hillery!
If you thank it was bad under Billy Boy, just wait until she controls the Drones!
Speranza, i think the Republican party has to move away from the Neocons on foreign policy. It has totally baffled me why Kelly Ayotte has started hanging around with Walnuts McCain and Miss Lindsay Graham? Doesn’t she aspire for higher office?
I won’t say hillary is unbeatable. Remember, it was supposed to be her who was nominated in 2008. She can be beaten. She has been beaten, and she looks awful. Looks matter in today’s world of super-star presidents. Still, she’ll have the power of a fawning press and name recognition. She will be a formidible candidate. We have some good talent on the bench, though. Marco Rubio or even Ted Cruz could be formidible in their own right. And four more year of Obama may leave the country tired of the mendacity of Democrats. We’ll see.
Iron Fist wrote:
I like Rubio, but the gang of eight may be his down fall. Not that some of the ideas are bad, but if or how they will get stuffed with the border issue. Not sure if reports are correct, but if true the border will not be secured again. Wish we could get a true picture of what the gang has agreed to. I know it’s just a frame work, but details matter.
I still hate Karl Rove!
@ Iron Fist:
Hillary Clinton is going to be Democratic nominee if she want’s it. If she does, she’ll win. Name one person that can beat her?
theoutsider wrote:
If we are lucky Satan will call her home! The ultimate primary win for us!
Speaking of the Democrat Party, Cook County Judge Cynthia Brimm was found
not guilty of assauling (pushing) a Baliff outside the courthouse by reson of
insanity.
It seems that tehe judge is often delusional and actually at one point had to be
carried out of her own court room.
But she keeps getting voted back in.
@ theoutsider:
Marco Rubio for one. It is still well early for calling 2016. How popular will Obama be after four more years? I’m not so sure Hillary will get the nomination, anyway. She is, affter all, a person of pallor, and the Democrat Party discriminates against them.
theoutsider wrote:
I agree that the whole idea of nation building amongst Muslims is insanity. However for many on the Left and the paleocon Right the term neo-con is a code word for a certain “shifty and cosmopolitan” type of person.
Iron Fist wrote:
She is also plug ugly.
@ RIX:
They don’t call it Crook County for no reason…!
theoutsider wrote:
Deval Patrick who is Black and Martin O’Malley who is even more leftist then Hillary.
Iron Fist wrote:
Susana Martinez would give her a hell of fight and would have a decent chance of beating her.
Tanker wrote:
Nothing is going to get the border secured. The drug trade is too big. I bought Sudafed for my cold this morning, and I swear it would have been easier to get Crystal Meth. We endure all manner of inconvenience in the name of combatting illegal drugs (including a shockingly high incarceration rate), but it is all ultimately futile without securing the border. There’s no will to secure the border. The drug king-pins pay off some of the congressmen, I am sure (and probably own a few Senators as well), but the rich love their gardeners and business loves the cheap labor. The intrenched interests are too great in keeping the border open. It would require Presidential leadership to do anything, and we aren’t going to see that in the next decade. Rest assured, though, that when the economy crashes the Mexicans will all go home to Mexico. The drug trade, though, will stay with us until drugs are legalized.
@ Speranza:
To me, Neo-con means endless wars.
theoutsider wrote:
To me appeasement means defeat and terrorism.
@ RIX:
How many of your County Commission are under indictment right now? 3 or 4? And Rahm Emmanual is more worried a citizen might buy a gun to defend themselves from the criminals than he is doing anything abou tthe criminals themselves. That’s one reason there are so many shootings in Chicago. Criminals know they won’t be prosecuted.
Regarding Hillary Clinton
Iron Fist wrote:
It may be true on legalizing drugs, not something I want to see though. As with abortion, it becomes personal for me because of my families experiences with both.
@ Iron Fist:
Emanuel & the rest of the Cook County Machine including Axlerod have an
explanation for the out of control gun violence in Chicago.
They claim that it’s because surrounding areas don’t have tough gun laws.
It’s nutty.
Speranza wrote:
She’s certainly one I have interest in. She is solid on th eSecond Amendment. She’d provide a challenge to Hillary’s “First Woman President”, though you can rest assured that she’d be attacked as “anti-woman”. It would be a very interesting contest. Our bench is deep for 2016. MArco Rubio, Suzana Martinez, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, and on. Quite a diverse group, and all solid conservatives on the issues that matter.
@ Speranza:
Who’s appeasing?
Iron Fist wrote:
Just make sure that the odious pig vomit Rove does not sneak Jeb Bush in.
theoutsider wrote:
Obama has his lips on the butts of every Islamic tyrant out there. Hagel, Kerry, and Brennan are not much better. Deny that!
@ RIX:
The guns come in and shoot people all by themselves! It’s like the Terminator. Walking machines of destruction! It couldn’t have anything to do with the culture of Chicago, could it? I mean, look at the crime in all those areas where guns are legal. It’s as high as Chicago, isn’t it? It has to be, because that’s where all the guns come from! If the crime was lower there, then that’sd mean the guns have nothing to do with the crime rate, and that’d be silly!
Speranza wrote:
“You have reached the Clinton White House. Please listen carefully, for our options have changed. If you are calling with a SuperPAC contribution, press 1. If you are calling about raising taxes, press 2. If you are calling about domestic policy, press 3. If you are calling about foreign policy, press 4. If you are calling about defense cuts, press 5. If you are calling about an ongoing attack on one of our embassies, and are in imminent peril, press 6. Please stay on the line; your call is very important to us, and will be answered by the first available operator in the order it was received. This is the last message you will hear.”
Today is Trayvon Martins birthday. Happy birthday in his honor was sung
outside of the Court House this morning.
Miami is celebrating Trayvon week & there will be a dinner celebrating his
life this week.
Speranza wrote:
Jeb Bush is unelectible. Because of George Bush not defending himself against the Left, the Bush name is toxic in the United States today. If the Republicans run Jeb Bush in 2016, it’ll be because they want to lose. And whomever the Dems put up will get, not the 48 State blowout Rodan seems to want to see, but over 30 States. It wouldn’t be close.
If the Republicans had any brains—yeah, yeah, I know; they don’t—they would take a piece from Clinton’s “3AM call” video ad from 2008 and splice it with a version of the voicemail answer that I suggest in #27, maybe intercut with a little nice, flaming Benghazi footage, and run it all over the place.
They’d kill any chance she ever had of running for President.
Good Mornin All! I’ve dumped politics
and have gone into survival mode.
@ Iron Fist:
The criminal street gangs are responsible for the huge majority of gun violence
in Chicago.
One reason that they don’t crack down on the gangs is because they are foot
soldiers for the Machine.
Sheriff Joe Arpaiao victimized by credit card fraud; his card is “used” in…Chicago, a place he hasn’t visited in years.
I’m sure there’s absolutely no significance in the location where the fraud took place.
Corrupt Communist Chinese (is there any other kind?) are buying up luxury properties in America and the west. It’s one of the things keeping the luxury market afloat in our depression economy.
@ Speranza:Bu@ Speranza:
Bullshit. Gimme some links.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
Yeah, Benghazi would be a tremendous albatross to hang around her neck if whomever she was running against would use it. It would have been a tremendous albatross to hang around Obama’s neck in this past election, though, and Romney refused to use it. Romney left a lot of good shots unfired. One thing is clear: while I and many others believed that this was the most important election since 1864, Romney didn’t believe that. He apparently didn’t much care if he lost the election. If we are to win in 2016, we need to run someone who wants to win. That is the first thing we have to find. Romney wanted the nomination bad enough to play dirty pool against other Republicans, but, like McCain before him, he saved his best shots for other Republicans. He left so many of them unfired at Obama.
theoutsider wrote:
Guess baby doesn’t follow the news.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Buzz, you are needed over at PJMedia, They have some Morons…oh.I mean Morans writing there! Rove butt buddy!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
He believes whatever Rachel Maddow tells him.
Obama is selling our U.S. oil and natural gas to China to force us to be even more dependent on foreign energy — and raise the price we pay at the pump. Can you see $5 or $10/gal in the near future?
Meanwhile the enviro-wackos screaming about fracking a silent on the issue.
Why would anybody think appeasement? That’s just silly.
Speranza wrote:
There, fixed that for ya!
theoutsider wrote:
Links are at Obama’s golf course. I don’t have time for this.
Watch your language too.
@ Speranza:What does appeasement have to do with NEO-Conservatism?
RIX wrote:
That has got to be a joke.
theoutsider wrote:
Appeasement is far more dangerous. Ask Chamberlain, Neville if he were still alive how well appeasement worked out for him.
@ Fritz Katz:
BZZZT! Instant Fail! Petroleum production in Chesapeake Bay? Uh, no. Chesapeake the company selling an interest to CNOOP? Has fuck-all to do with Obama. China (or anybody else) investing capital in US oil/gas production makes us more dependent on foreign oil? In what universe?
Is this from World Nut Daily or something? I ask, because after seeing the massive Fail in the snippet, I’m not going to bother to click on the link.
No they did the piece on FNC this morning complete with Happy Birthday
Trayvon, outside of the Court House.
They had pictures of him in his hoddie & released black ballons.
@Outsider please do not run away
10 Quotes By Barack Obama About Islam
10 Quotes By Barack Obama About Islam
#1 “Islam has always been part of America”
#2 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities”
#3 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”
#4 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
#5 “So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed”
#6 “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality”
#7 “As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.”
#8 “I look forward to hosting an Iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan here at the White House later this week, and wish you a blessed month.”
#9 “That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
#10 “I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”
Tanker wrote:
It was probably foolish, but I wrote a little response to Moran’s column.
@ Iron Fist:
Agree 100%!
Tanker wrote:
A little sea chantey:
Republicans are nearly wrecked
Mark well what I do say—
Republicans are nearly wrecked
‘Cause Karl Rove’s been their “architect”
I’ll go no more a-Roving with Karl Rove’s aid!
A-Roving, a-Roving
‘Cause Roving’s been my ru-i-in
I’ll go no more a-Roving with Karl Rove’s aid…
theoutsider wrote:
Neo-Cons are Leftist moles. I despise the fact they cowardly call any of their critics anti-Semites. Yes some Leftists and Paulians use the term Neocon to go after Jewish Conservatives, but most critics of that ideology don’t mean it that away. Last time I looked Bush and McCain were not Jewish.
To me Neocons are nothing but naive fools or paid agents of the Saudi Arabia. I wish they had less influence in the GOP. But they are protected and coddled because of Leftists attacks.
Andy McCarthy is one of the few on the Right who went after the Neocons. he dared them to call him an anti-Semite, since his Pro-Israel credentials are solid. They never even dared!
@ Tanker:
I can’t stand Rove. He swindled millions out of people in the last election.
Rodan wrote:
Rove is a charlatan and a fraud.
@ Speranza:
Both Appeasement and Nation Building are dangerous. A Middle path is needed that rejects the Extremist foreign policies of Bush (Nation Building) and Obama (Appeasement). I’m tired that it has to be either or. Republicans need to go back to the foreign policy of Eisenhower and Reagan.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Read it. Great break down of his flawed assertions. Not sure it was wise on your part, but you are principled not just witty.
Where did theoutsider disappear too? He asked for links and I gave him one.
@ Speranza:
His meltdown on Fox was classic. He was lying and giving the Romney campaign and his Senate candidate false data.
Tanker wrote:
I stuck the sea chantey up above in #53 in there too.
@ Tanker:
Rove is a slimeball.
Rodan wrote:
Rove and Roger Ailes are butt buddies. Rove has as much credibility with me as Dick Morris does.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I read it too. Well done!
Speranza wrote:
Thanks. If you guys put in a response or two in support of what I wrote, it might protect my flanks there a little.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I’m on the case.
@ Speranza:
He should be discredited, but no he still has clout. He’s a loser and a failure!
Stop calling “nation building” a neo-conservative concept. “Nation building” has been a core issue in American politics since the 19th century. Since the term “nation building” has no common academic definition a lot of other terms are in use (no politician likes to use the term “nation building” -- neither in Europe nor in the U.S.A.) but the concempt has always be the same. The military is reluctant of “nation building” because it demands a long term military presence in such a country. The US-Spanish war was the first “nation building”-war with a military presence at the Phillipines of one hundred years. Germany and Japan were successful (with long-term military presence) while Somalia and Haiti ended both in a disaster (to name only a few).
Nation-building has nothing, I repeat: NOTHING, to do with neo-conservativism.
10 Quotes By Barack Obama About Christianity
#1 “Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation”
#2 “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.”
#3 “Which passages of scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith?”
#4 “Even those who claim the Bible’s inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, sensing that some passages -- the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ’s divinity -- are central to Christian faith, while others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life.”
#5 “The American people intuitively understand this, which is why the majority of Catholics practice birth control and some of those opposed to gay marriage nevertheless are opposed to a Constitutional amendment to ban it. Religious leadership need not accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this wisdom in their politics.”
#6 From Obama’s book, The Audacity of Hope: “I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic matters as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are of the same sex—nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.”
#7 “I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell. I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.”
#8 “Those opposed to abortion cannot simply invoke God’s will--they have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths.”
#9 On his support for civil unions for gay couples: “If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount.”
#10 “I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.”
Rodan wrote:
He is a “fixer” and a con artist. He reminds me of “Harold Hill” in The Music Man without the charm or talent.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I responded to you.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
Done and Done. Love your stuff!
@ Guggi:
They are the ones pushing it.
@ Guggi:
Very true. Mark Twain wrote extensively against US imperialism in the Phillipines.
@ Speranza:
I don’t get the hold Rove has.
Two Party Evil Money Cult.
Break up the Federal Govt.
1.One part of it only National Security.
2. Set up regional Federal Goverment operations 4 to 6.
3. Set it up in a way that no region has power alone as the East and West coast now do.
4. Any thing is better than this slow death march going on.
Rove is a cash to get re-elected high flow pipe line.@ Rodan:
Thanks, guys.
@ 30 buzzsawmonkey: Hilary answering the phone “what does it matter?” “Does it make any difference?”
@ 35 theoutsider: Quid pro quo
It’s broke can not be repaired, we must fix it.
The R’s and the D’s live off it.
We will die of it.
Speranza wrote:
Thou shalt not kill is pretty basic to Judeo-Christian values. Muslim values not so much.
“Hilary or any current Democrat and many Republicans when they answer the 3:00 A.M phone call.”
“Whats in it for me?”
or
“Can I ear mark X amount of dollars for my district if I help you?”
@ Rodan:
Bill Clinton a neo-con ? He was into “nation-building” while George H. Bush was against it (during the camapign).
@ Speranza: which is worse “butt buddies” or “bullshit” I think the former. but it is just me.
words are interesting once thought about.
On “Ear Marks”.
We the people are getting “ear marked” for the two party evil money cult slave market.
taxfreekiller wrote:
Yup, he’s a money scam artist.
It is “Thou shall not murder”.
“Thou shall fight evil and “kill” it.
tfl killed lots of evil@ Iron Fist:
Guggi wrote:
Many on the Left support nation building as well.
Republicans have traditionally been against nation building. In the 1920 The Republicans pulled US troops out of Latin America, Eisenhower ended the Korean War and Nixon got us out of Vietnam. It’s only with George W Bush that nation building became the central plank of GOP foreign policy.
This actually is an interesting topic!
Rodan wrote:
Hell, we can tell that simply by looking at the US.
Rodan wrote:
He did end the war but not “nation-building” on the contrary. South-Korea is a role model for nation-building and there are still US-troops there.
Ouch! Score one for Guggi!
@ Guggi:
The South Koreans did it themselves. The US protected them from Communist aggression, not create their nation.
Rodan wrote:
Quite true.
@ Rodan:
Eisenhower ended the war by threatening to take it nuclear.
Rodan wrote:
He is an overrated blowhard.
darkwords wrote:
Buttbuddies is worse. It means you are a a lackey.
Rodan wrote:
The Left hates him therefore the Right loves him, just like Nixon and W.
Rodan wrote:
They did nothing themselves. Everything was done -- at least providing concepts -- by the U.S.A. Even their refugee problem was solved by the U.S.A. Originally the U.S.A. had established the same body for Korean refugees as they did for the Arab refugees (UNRWA). They soon became aware that it didn’t work as it should and took the refugee-problem into their own hands away from the United Nations and solved it.
The same in Germany: most Germans believe that the economic concept after WWII was one of Ludwig Erhardt but no, it was the concept of Edward A. Tenenbaum. Even the name “Deutsche Mark” (you call it “Deutschmark”) came from Tenenbaum.
Todays problems origin in the fact that a professional military doesn’t have the ressources for “nation-building”. They have forgotten to establish another body of civil specialists of all kinds who can do the “nation-building”-work.
Rodan wrote:
He only got one Senator elected.
Nation building does not work in nations that ate multi-ethinc and Islamic.
Nation building worked in Germany and Japan after World War II because it was not multi ethnic and had been utterly defeated.
Mike C. wrote:
Uh, Yes. It’s the Chesapeake energy company they bought (the link had a typo, and called it “Chesapeake Bay”).
China National Offshore Oil Company bought a huge stake in an American shale oil project, according to China Daily.
The deal, valued at $570 million, will see China buy a third of Chesapeake Energy Corporation’s Niobrara Shale project.
http://www.businessinsider.com/china-cnooc-investment-niobrara-shale-2011-2
In this universe. It’s called the law of supply and demand — if the Chinese send our energy supplies back to China, then we have less supply and our prices must go up.
Well, I don’t give a shit if you click on the damn linky or not. I provided a proper source for my statement. What you do with it is your problem not mine.
Here’s a linky for everyone else (not Mike C.). Don’t click on it if you think it might be from the World Nut Daily.
China’s Footprint in U.S. Oil: A State-by-State List
@ Fritz Katz:
Er, is CNOOC sending any of the production they bought into years ago in the US back to China? Are YPF, Repsol, BP, Total, Petrobras and who knows else sending their uS production back to Argentina, Spain, England, France, Brazil and wherever respectively? No, they’re not.
You see, this is one of those “for profit” deals. The companies mentioned aren’t in the oil business -- they’re in the money business. As to CNOOC (and Sinopec) specifically, the more oil the US produces domestically, the less foreign oil the US buys, leaving more available for China. As a sidebar, there is more capital available for development of US resources. What exactly did you think China was going to do with all those US dollars?
Do try and keep up, eh?
@ Fritz Katz:
So China has invested somewhere’s north of $ 13 billion in non-controlling shares in oil deals in the US. How much have British, French, Spanish, Italian, Brazilian, Argentinian, etc. companies invested? Are any of them exporting oil or jobs?
Mike C. wrote:
China is now building the world’s largest oil tanker fleet. Included in that fleet will be the world’s largest oil tanker. Hmmm, why else do you think they’re building all that shipping capacity if not to ship the oil somewhere. I think that ‘somewhere’ just might be back to China. China must import over 50% of it’s oil in order to survive and it’s going to have to import a lot more in order to expand.
Petrobras is shutting down refining in the US and Japan to make refining investments in Brazil. So, yes, they’d have to ship any US production back to Brazil in order to refine it.
Do try and keep up, eh?
@ Fritz Katz:
ADDENDUM -- AND CUBA’S DRLLING OUR OIL!!! ELEVENTY!!!
China is the world’s second-largest consumer of oil behind the United States, and the second-largest net importer of oil. China is the largest global energy consumer (70% of China’s energy is from coal).
Currently most of China’s oil imports are from the middle east. With a growing share from Venezuela and “Other” (which might include Gulf of Mexico, Pemex, US, sources). I don’t think the world’s largest oil tanker will fit through the Panama canal even after the widening. China must import a lot more over the next few years.
Mike C. wrote:
Hey, Mike C., you left the caps lock key on. It makes your posts look childish.
Yes, as a matter of fact, the Chinese are funding the Cubans to drill in the Gulf. Just off the coast of Florida.
Cuban oil project fuels US anxieties
For November 2012, the US exported 2.2 MMBO of crude oil
For November 2012, the US imported 303 MMBO of crude oil.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_exp_dc_NUS-Z00_mbbl_m.htm
Poke around -- the numbers aren’t hard to find.
Fritz Katz wrote:
It was supposed to look childish. The Cubans have granted leases to a number of companies, one of which is Chinese. They’re drilling in Cuban waters. The US dictated what constituted Cuban waters, back when.
Mike C. wrote:
Exported 2.2 MMBO of just crude — but the total including refined was 102.1 MMBO.
Point is, the US is declining in production and consumption — China is growing. From the same source: the EIA.
My main point is the Obama regime is very friendly to selling the US out to Chinese interests. In contrast, the Bush administration blocked the Unocal deal with CNOOC.
@ 113 Fritz Katz: China is also buying up a lot of coal. Big stink here about building a port for Coal Trains from Montana.
@ Mike C.: Yes but without the Philippines we wouldn’t have the 45 cal. Colt Model 1911.