Ron Paul: Iran war will triple energy prices

[Flashermac]

But just think of the benefits if we beat Iran!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cavanami]

I say...oil will be $200 a barrel by the end of the year and gas, at the pumps in the USA, will be between $6 and $8 a gallon!

 

The new President, will take some "action" and slightly lower the prices and get his (her?) ratings up quickly.

 

It's all a game, except to the little poeple, like most of us are!

[Old Hippie]

The radio said some guy with a name I can't pronounce, is calling for oil to hit $170 a barrel by December. The fact of the matter is simple, when it hits a point where no one can afford it, or the goods that are produced or moved by it, then what?

 

I honestly believe this is a man made problem, and only man can solve it. I say find those responsible, and make them pay.

[Bangkoktraveler]

As long as USA citizens can be blinded in to paying for high price oil, the oil dealers will continue selling it at an inflated price. It can be liken to USA citizens paying for Iraqi medical while neglecting the same medical care in our own country. It is our taxes. We should get something for it instead of somebody else reaping the benefits from our taxes. If GWB goes to Iran, oil may tip $400 a barrel. I would say it might be too late to do anything about anything if that happens. What people should start thinking about is returning the country to its citizens now.

[Old Hippie]

The democrats are to big a pussies to impeach the bastard...

[Bangkoktraveler]

Maybe they will impeach him after he invades Iran and extends his term for an undetermined amount of time. But then, it might be to late.

[Steve]

The democrats are to big a pussies to impeach the bastard...

 

The Republicans had no basis (on precedence) to impeach Clinton and the Democrats have basis (if not lying outright bad faith in presenting facts to send the country into a war) and won't impeach.

 

In a strange way, it may be a good thing if oil hits $300 or even $400 per barrel. One of two things will happen. We'll finally have an energy policy that makes us either not reliant on foreign oil or (my preference) we change course to Hybrids, fuel cell or something else.

 

The bad is that we believe the lie the oil companies and Repubicans will tell us and drill everywhere that even suggests oil.

 

Someone posted on here fairly recently that America is a major oil producer but we don't count ourselves as one. We also don't rely on mid-east oil nearly as much as people think. In fact, the vast majority of our oil is from outside the persian gulf.

 

'73 tells me that we have learned nothing from the past. We experienced long lines at the pump and went back to spending and relying on foreign oil or an oil based economy anyway.

 

As I've said in a previous posts about the subject, I'm 100% sure if a collective will amongst the G8 were to embrace hybrids or fuel cell and/or come up with a 'Manhattan Project' to develop alternate fuels we could do it. I find it strange we can get a man on the moon, come up with the most innovate weaponry, other inventions but the basic car engine has pretty much been unchanged for decades with only minor improvements when we compare it to other things.

 

We need a Republican to embrace the idea. It seems that you need a person from the camp that opposes something to be the one that can have the most influence to change it.

 

It took a southern Democrat (Johnson) to end Jim Crow. It took a conservative, right wing hawk Republican (Nixon) to recognize China or create the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). It took a Democrat to drastically alter welfare (Clinton).

 

If we're going to change we'll need a Republican with ties to big oil. Bush would have been perfect. Maybe he'll get 'religion' and do us that favor before he leaves office and leave us with something we can credit him with.

[Flashermac]

Only two US presidents have been impeached. Andrew Johnson was impeached by the Radical Republicans because he fired one of his cabinet members. Stiff Willy was impreached by the Reactionary Republicans because he lied repeatedly about a BJ.

 

Gotta love American politics.

 

[Steve]

Andrew Johnson's was really about bad feelings from the civil war. He was a southerner.

 

As far as Clinton, the reason why I doesn't meet the test of impeachment is because the founders wanted impeachment to be when a President misuses the office. They sited some examples like treason. High crimes and misdemeanors was meant to be crimes associated with the office like bribery. What a president does outside the scope of his office, as a citizen is for the judicial courts that apply to all americans. There are two persons in the white house. The president and the individual. If he takes a bribe to pardon someone then he's impeached by the congress. If he steals an item from the 7-11, even while he is president then he's prosecuted by criminal courts.

 

Aaron Burr was a sitting VP when he had a duel and subsequently killed Alexander Hamilton, the Sect'y of the Treasury in NJ over a matter of personal honor. Dueling was outlawed in NJ. Burr went back to Washington DC to resume his duties as VP. The state of NJ issued a warrant for his arrest for murder and sought impeachment and his arrest. The Congress wouldn't do either. They said that he went to NJ representing his self and not the office of VP. They'll have to wait for him to go to NJ again.

 

When articles of impeachment were being drawn up for Nixon one of the articles included tax evasion. The Republicans successfully argued that it be taken out. They argued that if he did evade taxes he did so as Richad Nixon, the citizen. He did not use his office to evade taxes. A tax return is done by the individual not the office.

 

Clinton was involved in a civil lawsuit against his person when he lied about getting a BJ. He did not use his office to lie in that deposition. the lawsuit was a civil lawsuit against his person not the office. The office had no part or had nothing to do with the civil lawsuit, the act in the lawsuit occured before he was president. The impeachment was therefore not legal under the spirit of the process and also under previous precedences.

 

Its said an impeachment is a political process and it is but it has limits in scope and reach. Only those acts done using the office to engage in a crime are eligible for impeachment in congress, any other crimes are a civil or criminal court matter.