Where We Are, Where We Were and Where I Think We're Headed

It's been a rather wild year, and there's no doubt that we who have lived through it have become partakers of the ancient Chinese curse regarding “interesting times.” It's only natural for those who see something of the significance of those times to try to figure out where things are headed.

At the end of last year, oil prices were taking off like a passenger jet from an airstrip. Certain sectors of the global economy were faltering, but there was not the wholesale failure and wreckage seen in recent months. Iraq seemed to be “stablizing,” the “surge” seemed to be working. Many who had recently heard of Peak Oil (by recent, I mean those with less than a year's awareness of this subject) were like me, excitedly telling what we knew to anyone who would listen, expecting major, widespread and imminent changes, and frantically trying to prepare.

The first several months of 2008 did not disappoint. We saw widespread mortgage failures, the deaths of several banks, the appearance of massive zones of foreclosed properties, the stripping of partially-built and abandoned housing tracts, and an oil price which briefly rose to nearly $150 a barrel, as well as widespread evidence of accelerating man-made climate change. Some who followed these trends announced that Peak Oil had definitely arrived, that one proof of this would be that the price of oil would continue to rise quickly to astronomical levels (say, $300 a barrel), and that the world would see a rapid increase in geopolitical conflicts as a result.

But then the world witnessed a series of rather confusing events. There was geopolitical conflict to be sure in Georgia's Ossetian region. But the price of oil began to fall, and continued falling even as the United States was hit by two hurricanes which resulted in widespread shortages of gasoline throughout the American Southeast. I thought the fall in price was due to manipulation by corporate interests to prevent Americans from seeing the true condition of our country's energy supply and economy until after the election. Now I am thinking that while that may have been partly true from July to September, there are now much stronger natural causes at work behind the drop in petroleum prices. It seems that the failure of the American economy over the last few months had actually reached a point which resulted in a significant, long-term decrease in the use of oil and refined petroleum products. This is what drove the price of oil sharply down, along with the collapse in economic activities such as manufacturing and shipping due to the credit crisis.

Among the predictions I encountered frequently when I was just beginning to find out about Peak Oil is the thought that once oil prices hit a certain level, the global economy would instantly and catastrophically collapse. We now know that a collapse of sorts has occurred, yet it hasn't been as severe, widespread or sudden as some predicted. I still have a job, and I know many others who still do. But we are not unaffected. My company derives much of its business from providing design engineering services to industrial and petrochemical clients. This summer one of our upcoming projects was put on hold indefinitely, and within the last two weeks several petroleum projects were canceled due to the drop in the price of oil. This has put several of our other offices in a bind. Perhaps I should say that I still have a job for the time being. I feel somewhat like people who recorded video footage of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami from the relative safety of the upper stories of hotels or restaurants on higher ground, while watching their fellow humans being swept away. And the collapse is still in its early stages, according to the sources I read and trust.

As I said earlier, it's only natural when facing such uncertain times to wonder what the shape of coming events will be. Some writers analyze the fine nuances of global geopolitical games being played by the major nations of the world. Others analyze the meaning of the various financial moves being made by corporations, banks and stock markets. Yet others analyze the significance and strategy of the various “terrorist” attacks that make up the present asymmetric war against the American empire and Western dominance of the world. Then there are those who don't bother with any of those things, having concluded simply that life as they know it is about to change irreversibly and drastically, and who are simply trying to adjust as best as they can. I identify most with people in this last category, yet I am curious as to how things in the larger world will turn out. And I tend to form opinions and make predictions. Here are a few, for anyone who's interested. But take them with a grain of salt. There are, after all, many highly educated and famous “crashwatchers” writing about these things on the Web nowadays, and they have access to information that I don't possess. Look at me simply as a sort of amateur golfer on a Saturday afternoon who dreams that he's Tiger Woods.

Here then is where I think we are. The global credit crisis is a crisis of currency of sorts. It was caused by the fact that banks and investment houses created certificates of worth out of the interest-bearing debts of hundreds of millions of small, working-class people. When Peak Oil arrived (and I do most definitely believe that it has arrived), and the prices of food and energy began to skyrocket, these poor people were unable to make regular payments on their debts. This caused massive debt defaults, reducing the value of the certificates of worth based on these debts to near zero. Moreover, the poor and working-class people who drove the consumer economy were no longer able to grow their consumption to satisfy the demands of a “growth” economy. The even poorer people who actually made consumer goods in Third-World factories were not able to even begin consuming things beyond food and energy. Thus the growth economy faltered and began to collapse, driving down the prices of finished goods and raw materials such as petroleum products.

Note, however, that the collapse in prices of raw materials and petroleum is not due to finding additional supplies of these, because no new easy-to-get, concentrated supplies have been found. The new supplies of oil that have been discovered have all been deposits that will present extreme technical challenges and require lots of capital, energy and equipment in order to exploit. Remaining deposits of coal and minerals from molybdenum to phosphorus are all becoming more and more diffuse, and require digging and processing ever-greater quantities of ore in order to get a given quantity of refined product. Commodity prices have collapsed due to the collapse of the credit market, which has cut off prospective buyers from the means to buy raw materials. Because of the resulting collapse in price for these materials, and because of the increasing cost of new projects to extract these materials, extractors and miners of these materials are canceling projects right and left.

But this is a dangerous situation. Let's say that the credit crisis works itself out eventually, and buyers and sellers of raw materials and finished goods decide on a new medium of exchange, one which inspires trust and confidence that the units of its currency represent actual value. That confidence may be misplaced, but that's another story. Nevertheless, let's say that there's a restoration of confidence in credit markets which results in another attempt at global economic growth. This growth spurt will very quickly run up against the same scarcity of resources which caused the price of raw materials such as oil, phosphorus and copper to spike earlier this year. The price spike will make finished goods made from these raw materials unaffordable to most of the world's population, and another collapse will result. An ever-quickening cycle of attempts at growth followed by collapses will ensue, and this will be the proof that we have passed Hubbert's Peak for most of the resources on which our global, “official” economy depends. The fact that the collapses cause investors to cancel new mining or energy projects means that the attempts at global economic growth will falter more quickly, because of the decline of existing supplies of oil and minerals. In short, I see an ever-shortening series of cycles of attempted growth and collapse over the next few years, before a final and unavoidable stage of worldwide economic decline sets in.

As for oil supplies, I am no geologist or petroleum expert. But I tend to believe that the Energy Watch Group Oil Report released in 2007 is accurate, and that world oil production has already peaked and is now in irreversible decline. I think that 2009 will be the year in which this becomes undeniably and painfully obvious.

As far as our adaptation as a nation to these things, I have a few things to say that may be hard for some to swallow. I am a “recovering Republican” who quit the GOP in 2006, because I was disgusted by their money-grubbing, closet racism, and role in the present American corporatocracy. Yet in watching the Democrats since then, I have seen many Democratic politicians who are servants of that same corporatocracy. So while I voted for Obama in this last election (the very first time I ever voted Democrat), I am unwilling to become wildly enthusiastic about what he will do in office. My skepticism is especially strong when I see some of the people he has picked to be part of his administration. If he nominates Hillary Clinton to be secretary of state, that would not be a good sign for many Third World residents who are suffering from the invasion of their countries by rich Western multinational corporations. His choice for attorney general is Eric Holder, a man who helped defend Chiquita Brands International against charges that the corporation hired and supplied “death squads” in Colombia to murder those opposed to Chiquita's business practices. And there is the support Mr. Obama has shown for all of the bank bailouts that have taken place this year.

I think there is a real danger that Obama may turn into a mere symbol of “change” rather than being an actual change, and that “change” may be defined as nothing more than saying nice things about wanting to help poor people and having a “diverse” government. In short, I think Mr. Obama may try to take the same path that President Bill Clinton did during his administration – defining being “progressive” in terms of “tolerance” and “diversity” and talking much about supporting the little guy, yet all the while being a servant of our present corporatocracy. The strategy worked quite well for President Clinton for a while, even though Western corporations were ruinously exploiting the rest of the world and were accelerating their outsourcing and deregulation of the American economy under his watch. But Mr. Clinton and most of the mainstream media were caught entirely off guard by the WTO riots and protests in Seattle in 1999.

I think a similar surprise awaits Mr. Obama if he tries to take the same path. There is not much real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. I think those who are in power in Washington and who are about to come into power have a common goal: to preserve the American empire and Western dominance of the world for as long as possible. Whereas President Bush did so clumsily and artlessly, Mr. Obama may be urged to do so smoothly and suavely as Clinton did. So it wouldn't surprise me to see that there is no immediate rush to bring American troops home from Iraq or Afghanistan. Nor would it surprise me to see our government continuing to aggressively push “free-trade” agreements in as many regions as possible. And while I expect that the Kyoto accords may be signed, I think our “answer” to climate change and energy will be to make a lot of noise about finding a technological fix rather than learning to live more modestly. On the home front, I expect both Democrats and Republicans to justify the need to keep the Patriot Act in force. And I expect that the poor of this country will continue to be required to bear the losses of the rich.

Yet I also expect that there will be a strong backlash if our nation's government continues to serve corporate interests as it has. I don't think that backlash will be seen first in our country, but rather abroad. It will often take the form of violent attempts by Third World residents to free themselves from American corporate domination. It will be called “terrorism” by the American media. And it will be one of the things that leads to the breakdown of the American empire, because of the costs borne by those who try to stop it and the futility of their efforts. I expect the earliest acts of that backlash to occur far sooner in Mr. Obama's administration than they did in Mr. Clinton's administration.

In short, it wouldn't surprise me to see an Obama administration trying desperately to maintain the same global “official” system that the Bush administration served. Yet the system is breaking, and the attempts so far to save it are only hastening its demise. The world is about to get much bigger again.

As far as a timetable, I have my own guesses. But I'm keeping them private. In the meantime, my advice to anyone who is reading is to work on building your own safety nets, your connections to your immediate community, and your repertoire of useful and necessary skills. And enjoy the low commodity prices while you can, because they will probably soon go back up. Today I saw regular unleaded gasoline on sale for $1.79 a gallon...

Of Thieves and Elections

Over the last few weeks, there have been alarming reports of voter registration “irregularities” taking place in swing states in the days leading up to November 4^th. Most of these irregularities involve the questionable purging of hundreds of thousands of registered voters from official records in several states, including many voters whose home mortgages were foreclosed. It appears that the Republican party has been behind the push for these voter purges. Here's a short list of purges and of secretaries of state responsible for maintaining voter rolls:

Colorado: Secretary of State – Mike Coffman, Republican. Number of voters purged from Colorado registration rolls within the last six months: 37,000 according to the New York Times. There is also word that state election officials told some college students that they could not vote if their parents claimed them as dependents (Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/25/uselections2008.democrats)

Michigan: Secretary of State – Terri Lynn Land, Republican. Number of voters purged from Michigan state rolls in August: 33,000. (In all, over 200,000 names have been removed since January 1. Source: http://www.freep.com/article/20081013/NEWS15/81013077) Michigan also purged voters who lost their homes to foreclosure, and voters who had drivers' licenses from other states. By contrast, only 7,100 people died in Michigan in August, and only 4,400 moved out of state. For additional information, see http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/09/18/aclu-sues-michigan-over-voter-purge-program-saying-it-hurts-college-students.html

Louisiana: Secretary of State - John Leigh Dardenne, Jr., Republican. During the five weeks after July 23, at least 18,000 people were dropped from voting rolls. On June 15, 53,000 voters who had been displaced by Hurricane Katrina were threatened with removal from voting rolls unless they could prove that they were not registered in another state. The voters were mostly from poor black parishes. For more information, see http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-08-31-naacp-louisiana_N.htm and http://www.alternet.org/democracy/92695/?page=entire.

Indiana: Secretary of State – Todd Rokita, Republican. According to a recent Guardian article, up to 100,000 people are potentially at risk of losing their opportunity to vote (See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/20/republicans-voting).

It would be instructive to do a bit of digging to see what states have conducted massive voter purges within the last several months, and especially since August 4. Those states which conducted purges after August 4 are guilty of violating Federal election law. It would also be interesting to see how many of these states have Republican secretaries of state. I'd do the research myself, but I have to get to bed early because I have an early meeting tomorrow at work. One thing I'll say: watch the exit polls – especially from foreign media sources – on Election Day, and see how much of a discrepancy there is between them and the “official” tally.

And for a bit of very ironic news on a completely different subject, Bloomberg ran a story this week with a headline that reads, “Turmoil May Make Americans Savers, Worsening `Nasty' Recession.” It appears that the rich masters of our present economy are worried that Americans might start living within their means, thus gravely endangering the profits of the rich.

We're Not In A Democracy Anymore, Toto

...Or are we?

Tonight, the United States Senate voted 74-25 to authorize the $700 billion Wall Street bailout requested by President Bush. In the time leading up to the vote, at least one senator was quoted by Bloomberg News as saying that after the Dow's 700-point drop in response to the House rejection of the bill, this senator's office started receiving hundreds of calls in support of the Bush administration's bailout request.

That seems odd, given that most online polls still show that a solid majority of Americans opposes this bailout. Most of the people I know still oppose this bailout. I still oppose this bailout. It appears that perhaps the quoted senator (and Bloomberg News) was stretching the truth. At any rate, it should be abundantly clear that the opinions of the majority of Americans no longer matters to the cronies and kleptocrats now running our country. (By the way, for those who read my post titled, "Pavlov's Politics," I want you to know that both Obama and McCain voted for the bailout, as well as Joe Biden.)

These people are set to try to ram the bailout package through the House, perhaps as early as this Friday. The urgency of this legislative push is what strikes me. It's a play right out of Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine. Only the House of Representatives stands between the American people and the greedy mouths of the rich. Do what you can to oppose this bailout, including e-mails and phone calls, not only to your congressional representatives, but to local media as well. But make backup plans to deal with life in a country whose leaders have become poison.

Money and Filthy Hands

In my last post, “Uncle Sam's Vital Signs,” I wrote that Southern California is a ruined place, ruined by the land use, economic and development policies of an elite whose sole aim is to make money without regard for the effects of the means used to make that money. I also wrote that this elite is trying to make money from the rest of the country by making the rest of the country like Southern California. But some of the ruinous policies enacted by the members of this elite extend throughout California as a whole.

One particular example is the steady push by conservative politicians and political groups to criminalize ever-larger areas of public behavior, and to mandate ever-harsher sentences and penalties for behavior deemed to be criminal. This has led to explosive growth in the number of prison inmates in California, as well as explosive growth in the number of California prisons. And last year, California began signing contracts with private prison corporations to house inmates – something that has not happened since the mid-1800's. (Source: “Increase In Inmates Opens Door To Private Prisons,” Los Angeles Times, 24 August 2007, http://articles.latimes.com/2007/aug/24/business/fi-prisons24)

The huge cost of enforcing the many “get tough on crime” initiatives passed in California is a well-known drain on the state budget ($10.4 billion in Gov. Schwarzenegger's most recent proposed budget, or 7.6% of the total). It is also well-known that the fastest-growing segment of the California prison population consists of non-violent offenders. California's correctional system is groaning under the weight of its large number of inmates, and even prison guard and correctional officer unions are now agreeing with critics of the system that it is time to reduce the prison population by implementing rehabilitative alternatives such as drug treatment and counseling for non-violent offenders.

These issues, as well as mistreatment of prisoners in private prisons and the use of prisoners as low-wage “slave labor” were covered in a recent Mother Jones Magazine article, as well as two previous posts in this blog, The Well Run Dry, titled, “Pages Of Your Book On Fire” and “The Replacement Of Petroleum Slaves.” The Times article cited above states that private prisons are now being used by over thirty states, and are extensively used by the Federal government. Other sources note that prison guard unions and private prison corporations are sponsors, lobbyists or donors to campaigns for stiffening penalties for criminal behavior, and for expanding the definition of what constitutes criminal behavior. After all, if it's easy to lock people up, that's good for business! (Sources: “Families To Amend California's Three Strikes, http://www.facts1.com/reasons/money.htm#Prison; “Slavery and Involuntary Servitude,” Don Bacon, Lew Rockwell, http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/bacon1.html; “10 Reasons to Oppose Plans for More Prisons,” New American Media, 11 August 2006, http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=fa9cfec4e8d2984c1776d6ee4d3700c9; “Privatizing Prisons,” Center for Policy Alternatives, http://www.cfpa.org/issues/issue.cfm/issue/PrivatizingPrisons.xml)

It may be that the madness which infected California over the last two decades is playing itself out. But if one moves north just one state, one can find people trying the same tricks in order to make a profit for themselves. Two such people are Kevin Mannix and Loren Parks, who have introduced Measure 61(previously Measure 40 according to one source), a “Get Tough On Crime” measure on the November 2008 Oregon ballot. Measure 61 would significantly increase mandatory sentences for those convicted of “major crimes” as defined in the initiative. Some of the crimes on this list are definitely major. But some are nonviolent, and it is the nonviolent portion – especially the drug crimes and crimes against property – which would likely swell Oregon's prison roster. Those who oppose Measure 61 point out that Oregon already has stiff minimum sentencing guidelines for violent crimes, and that Measure 61 would add nothing new except to increase the severity of punishment of nonviolent criminals.

Measure 61 also enhances penalties prescribed under Measure 11, another measure sponsored by Kevin Mannix, which established mandatory minimum sentences for various violent crimes, and which was ratified in 1994. However, Measure 11 was made to apply to every defendant from the age of fifteen years and older, and does not allow reduction of prison time for good behavior. Thus a high school kid who got into a fight could wind up in prison for five years if convicted of second-degree assault. Twenty-eight percent of Oregon's present prison population consists of Measure 11 offenders. (Source: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oregon_Ballot_Measure_61_(2008)) Measure 11 has cost the state of Oregon significantly, and Measure 61 would cost between $450 million and $2 billion to implement, according to various estimates (http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2008/08/mannix_prison_measure_would_co.html). There are no provisions in Measure 61 for counseling or drug treatment programs.

I fully believe that violent crime is a serious matter, and should be appropriately punished. But it is interesting to note that a 2008 Oregon Department of Health Services study found that violent crime, drug use and property crime in Oregon have been decreasing from 2000 to 2005 (http://www.oregon.gov/DHS/addiction/ad/main.shtml; http://www.oregonmeasure11.com/portland-reports-low-crime-rate.html). It is also interesting to note that in the 1990's, while Kevin Mannix was a member of the Oregon legislature, he invited Nike to move its manufacturing operations from Indonesia to Oregon in order to take advantage of the cost savings of using prison labor (“Are There No Prisons?”, http://www.afn.org/~govern/Prisons.html). Kevin Mannix has sought to funnel large amounts of money to correctional employees over the years (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oregon_Ballot_Measure_61_(2008)#cite_note-increase-6). In fact, a Web search of Kevin Mannix will reveal a large number of questionable ballot initiatives backed by him.

Meanwhile, there are some very good state-funded education programs which are of interest and of great use to those Oregonians who are preparing for a post-Peak world – yet these programs are now shrinking due to budget cuts. One such program is the Oregon State University Master Gardeners' education program, which gives students a fairly advanced education in organic food gardening. Another program is the Oregon State University Family Food Educators/Master Food Preservers education program, which provides research and education on storing vegetables and fruits, vegetable harvesting, emergency preparedness, drying food and herbs, canning, pickling and much more. Yet programs like these, and services like mass transit and expansion of bicycle lanes and bike safety programs, may soon wind up being sacrificed in order to satisfy what is an emerging “corrections-industrial complex” in our society – yet another example of the raiding of public resources established for the public good, in order to satisfy the greed of corporatists.

And speaking of corporate raiding, it seems that Bolivia is now experiencing a great deal of civil unrest, due to the opposition of rich land and resource owners in that country to the redistributive reforms of President Evo Morales. Bolivia is rich in natural gas, and as the world runs out of cheap, easily available light sweet crude oil and begins to rely more on heavy and sour crudes, refineries are using more and more natural gas to refine that heavy sour crude. President Morales has resisted efforts by global corporations and Western governments to remove barriers to “free trade” and foreign ownership of Bolivian assets.

So it is interesting that this week, President Morales kicked the U.S. ambassador to Bolivia out of the country, accusing him of instigating a revolt against the elected government of Bolivia. There is evidence to back up this accusation, including the fact that the ambassador recently met with some of the rich resource owners who are opposed to Morales, and a news article which suggests that the violent protests against the Morales government may have been funded by the U.S. government, which earlier this year asked Peace Corps students to spy on the Bolivian government. It is also interesting to note that Evo Morales is the nation's first indigenous Native American president, and that the rich resource owners protesting against him are white. (Sources: “Bolivia Expels US Ambassador Philip Goldberg,” The Telegraph, 12 September 2008, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/bolivia/2801579/Bolivia-expels-US-ambassador-Philip-Goldberg.html; “U.S. Should Disclose Its Funding of Opposition Groups In Bolivia and Other Latin American Countries,” Center for Economic And Policy Research, 12 September 2008, http://www.cepr.net/index.php/press-releases/press-releases/u.s.-should-disclose-its-funding-of-opposition-groups-in-bolivia-and-other-latin-american-countries)

Bolivia may soon join the long list of countries jacked by the rich Anglo elites in the West, particularly those of the United States, who have discovered that the Mideast is not such a temptingly easy target as they may have thought in 2001 or 2002. All this so that we in the USA can continue to drive as fast as we please, in vehicles as large as we like, stuffing our appetites which have been swollen to ginormous size by steroidal advertising.

These things are a shame. Truly, “the love of money is root of all the evils” (1 Timothy 6:10).

A Dicey Time For A Road Trip

We live in interesting times. I am about to experience some very interesting times this weekend, because I am traveling a thousand miles to visit relatives in Southern California. And I am traveling by car. Some may ask why a man who believes that the worldwide peak of oil production is happening now would choose to travel by car – a man who is the author of a blog with a title like “The Well Run Dry.”

I would have liked very much to travel by train – after all, it may well be the most environmentally friendly way to go. But President Bush has bled our nation's passenger rail system nearly dry. An Amtrak trip would take over 29 hours. I suppose I could have flown, but airlines have been getting squeezed hard in recent months by high fuel prices, and have been implementing many cutbacks in order to maintain some semblance of profitability. I fear that the CEO's and boards of directors who are responsible for airline profits may have extended their cutbacks even to such things as aircraft maintenance. I don't want to find out firsthand that my suspicion is right. By the way, if any of you are planning to travel by air this weekend, here's some comforting reading: “Airline Removes Life Vests To Save Weight, Fuel,” Associated Press, 28 August 2008, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26440567/.

In my last post, I mentioned my suspicion that world daily petroleum production figures published by the International Energy Agency and the United States Energy Information Administration are perhaps being artificially inflated, and that world petroleum production may now be faltering. I also mentioned news articles coming from Saudi Arabia which indicate that the Saudi oil industry may be shorting Saudi citizens in order to give the appearance that Saudi Arabia is producing more oil than it actually is. Well, there has been more interesting news out of Saudi Arabia this week – yet another article quoting a Saudi Aramco official denying that there are any shortages of fuel. Of course, the official's actual words were, “The Company has not reduced quotas to authorized clients.” (Zawya, 25 August 2008, http://www.zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidZAWYA20080825044210/secIndustries/pagOil%20&%20Gas) Are some clients unauthorized? Are these unauthorized clients the ones who can't find diesel fuel?

Speaking of shortages, there are reports of fuel terminals in North and South Dakota and Minnesota running dry. North Dakota has experienced spot shortages in late summer and early fall for at least two years in a row. (Minneapolis Star-Tribune, 27 August 2008, http://www.startribune.com/local/27550659.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7EaDiaMDCiUT). And this week's EIA Weekly Petroleum Inventory shows U.S. commercial crude oil and refined petroleum stocks continuing to drop.

It also seems that our ever-vigilant and very talented U.S. spy/intelligence agencies have detected a possible link between Venezuela and the Islamic group Hezbollah. Apparently, U.S. government spokesmen believe that Hezbollah is using Venezuelan sites for terrorist training and targeting South American Jews, and that Iran is backing Hezbollah activities in Venezuela. It must only be a strange coincidence that both Venezuela and Iran have oil, and that the U.S. is very hungry for oil... (“Hezbollah Presence In Venezuela Feared,” Los Angeles Times, 27 August 2008, http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-venezterror27-2008aug27,0,3877203.story)

Lastly, there is a powerful and increasingly dangerous hurricane bearing down on the Gulf of Mexico, with at least three other storms behind it. It is quite possible that Hurricane Gustav could rival Katrina in destructiveness, and could destroy or damage many offshore oil platforms and onshore Gulf Coast refineries. If that happens, fuel prices in the US may well skyrocket, and North Dakota will by no means be alone in experiencing fuel shortages.

All in all, it's quite a time to be undertaking a road trip. I hope I make it to Southern California and back. If I see anything interesting along the lines of our present national difficulties, I may take a few pictures for my next post. Stay safe this weekend.

The Importance of the Timing of Peak Oil

On 6 August 2008, the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) released its latest International Petroleum Monthly report, which tallies world oil production for a given month. The latest EIA production figures shown in any given report are usually for a monthly period ending two months before the release date of the report, so this latest issue contains data for May 2008. According to this latest report, world petroleum supply averaged 86.05 million barrels per day in May of this year, which is a new record according to the EIA. World crude plus condensate production during May averaged 74.48 million barrels per day according to the same report, which is again a new record, passing the May 2005 record of 74.266 million barrels per day. In addition, this week OPEC issued its Monthly Oil Market Report, which estimated that world oil supply in July 2008 averaged 87.37 million barrels per day – again, a sign of growing petroleum supply. The release of these figures may be a contributing factor in the continuing slide in the price of oil and petroleum products.

However, some analysts have taken exception to these numbers, asserting that they may be overly optimistic. Gail Tverberg, a member of the Oil Drum staff recently wrote an article which questioned the reliability of initial EIA estimates of world production (“May 2008 EIA Oil Production Record. Will It Too Be Revised Downward?”, http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4386). She pointed out that these initial estimates are usually revised downward by the EIA as time passes, and noted discrepancies between EIA production figures for various countries versus what those countries stated as their actual production. She also pointed out the potential political motivations for the EIA to be less than accurate in telling what is actually going on with oil production. Others have analyzed the discrepancies between the EIA and OPEC numbers for specific countries and have noticed a rather fishy smell (see comments on today's “Drumbeat” section of the Oil Drum website). There is also at least one bit of anecdotal news that indicates that an oil exporting country is shorting its own citizens so that it can send more oil to the US.

I want to suggest (and I am not the only one suggesting this) that the present oil supply and oil market situation is being “gamed” by several powerful key players in order to give the false impression that there is no longer an oil supply “crisis.” This campaign of dishonesty is being aimed chiefly at the West, and specifically at the United States. Why the US? Because the US is still the most powerful nation on earth militarily, and because it is also still the world's most significant economic agent. That supremacy is increasingly resting on a foundation of deception, smoke and mirrors, but while it lasts, the US is a force to be reckoned with.

And this is a Presidential election year. The corporatist powers who actually control the governments of this country know how key a player an American president is in their plans, and will do all they can to install a president who is friendly to their interests. If the American people were to wake up to the actual precariousness of this nation and the magnitude of the mess our leaders have made for us, they might begin to demand the sort of radical changes that would threaten the corporatists.

To a lesser extent, the governments of some of the oil-producing countries are also interested in gaming the system, in order to prevent a large portion of Americans from having to suffer actual petroleum shortages, thus preventing the rise of an American neocon initiative to take over foreign oilfields the way Iraqi fields were seized.

All this means that it is more important than ever to search out the truth about present world oil production, so that we may know what to expect and be prepared to deal with it. I acknowledge a debt of gratitude to Jeffrey J. Brown, a registered Professional Geoscientist in the State of Texas, and to Dr. Samuel Foucher, a long-time oil production analyst. Because of their work and the efforts of others who posted valuable information on the Internet, I went from near-total ignorance of the true nature of our energy predicament to wide-awake alarm within the space of a few months. My awakening had been preceded by growing unease from 2005 to the beginning of 2007, like the unease of a sleep disturbed by an increasingly upset stomach. But it was in the first few months of 2007 that I truly came face to face with the reality of Peak Oil. That awareness has led me to some rather drastic lifestyle adjustments.

But Mr. Brown recently commented that the timing of the worldwide oil production peak is not as important as other issues which we are facing, such as the ongoing and accelerating decline in net world petroleum exports. Here I must respectfully disagree (and I invite him to correct any deficiency in my knowledge, since he knows much more about this than I do). Knowing the timing of the peak and the actual shape of the world oil production profile is very important, because the major controlling figures who run the global “official economy” are closely watching this very issue. I believe that many of them know that Peak Oil will be a severe threat to their status and the continuation of their economic empires, and that they also know that it's in their best financial interests to keep this knowledge from the masses for as long as possible. Therefore, as petroleum supplies become ever more constrained, they will continue to try to game the system, suppressing naturally-occurring market signals regarding supply and demand for as long as it's in their interests to do so. When they finally pull the wool from our eyes, we will surely be confronted by the sight of an economic system that's broken beyond repair for all but the very rich.

So we will need to devise other means for validating whether the world is in fact at or past peak. One bit of data that's still relatively reliable is the EIA Weekly Inventory Report of US commercial crude oil and petroleum product stocks. The EIA Weekly reports for the last three weeks have shown a steady decrease in finished gasoline stocks. This has been due to rising demand caused by lower prices. US crude oil inventories haven't moved from the 295 million barrel range. This seems to show that oil and gasoline prices have fallen because of a perception of reduced demand, and not because of any new supplies. Those who have skills in building complex mathematical models can come up with other means for determining the true state of world oil supply. And we can always look at obvious signs, such as news stories of refinery shutdowns or shortages around the world. Personally, I think we see the beginning of another price spike within the next month. One can't game the system forever. Keep your eyes open!

* * *

I want to start talking about preparations for a post-Peak world. I've been meaning to get onto this subject for a long time, but I keep getting distracted by juicy news stories from the oil patch. In my discussion, I intend to move from preparing yourself as a person to preparing your community (at least those closest to you). These thoughts are just what has occurred to me; others have thought much harder and more deeply, and for a longer time on this subject. As I find time, I will post links to some of their writings. One thing I will soon discuss is the use of appropriate technologies for a post-Peak life (i.e., should I buy solar panels? Should I buy a spinning wheel? How about a portable generator? and so on).

The first thing that occurs to me regarding a post-Peak life is facing the near-certainty that you will have to live such a life. Our economy and society have been built on certain assumptions – the assumptions of ever-increasing technological advancement, convenience, comfort, and prosperity.

These assumptions are about to be overturned.

But facing this reality is a very difficult thing to do for many people. One Peak Oil writer has compared the process of facing the threats of Peak Oil and climate change to Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's portrayal of the process of facing death, with its five stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. Most of America seems to be in the denial stage, as seen in the sales of tabloid magazines at supermarkets, the viewers of reality TV series, and the willingness to listen to corporate media slaves repeating their masters' assertions that everything will be all right. Some people are angry – especially those who have a vested financial or political interest in suppressing the truth of our predicament. But there are also bargainers. I am an engineer and I can tell you that engineers are some of the biggest bargainers around. Their bargaining consists of the unshakable faith that technology will somehow save us from having to live on less, from having to live a more difficult life than we have been used to (Read some issues of the IEEE Spectrum to see what I mean). All I can say is, Dream on!

If one is willing to accept the probability that life is going to get much more difficult, then one can begin to take inventory of all the conveniences he or she enjoys right now due to technology and cheap energy. Then one can begin to make plans for living without some of these conveniences. For instance, living in a time of expensive natural gas or fuel oil might mean learning ways of living without either during the wintertime. Living in a world in which many of your needs must suddenly be supplied by the power of your own muscles is easier if you have prepared beforehand by getting in shape. In other words, the first preparation you can make is to bravely face the future, take inventory of all of its implications, and then begin to harden yourself to be able to cope with it.

Some practical steps might include the following:

1. Learn to commute by bicycle. By commuting I don't mean recreational rides, but rather, going to places you need to visit in order to do necessary weekly activities. Gradually increase the percentage of your commuting per week until it's over 75 percent of your total commuting.

2. Train your body to be comfortable with the thermostat of your house turned down to 60 degrees F or below.

3. Work out regularly to build your strength and endurance. Make your workouts something that you can do at home, without having to drive to a gym.

4. Regularly put yourself into situations in which you must do without your usual comforts. Go camping – in a tent, not in an RV – in all kinds of weather. Learn what works in such situations, and what doesn't. If you feel really adventurous, go bicycle camping, and skip the drive altogether!

5. Learn to live on half of your present income, in the expectation that you may one day be forced to do so.

See if you can add a few suggestions of your own to this list. And tell yourself that you will learn to succeed in facing this challenge. Difficulty does not have to equal hopelessness.

A Bumpier Plateau

02-28-2023 Note: I have noticed that this post is one of the most popular and well-read posts on this blog.  However, this post is rather out of date, so it deserves a bit of clarification.  The 2008 Energy Watch Group report titled, "Crude Oil: The Supply Outlook" correctly estimated that the peak of global conventional oil production had already passed.  However, the total volume of petroleum liquids production was able to increase due to the extraction of unconventional oil by means such as hydrofracking.  In 2023, the potential for continued increases in petroleum liquids production seems to have been exhausted.  In the middle years of the first decade of the 21st century, there were many voices which predicted that the passing of the global peak of conventional oil production would trigger the collapse of industrial civilization and the onset of the "zombie apocalypse."  

These predictions clearly have not come true.  This is partly due to the boost in unconventional petroleum liquid production which occurred from 2008 onward.  It is also due to the rapid expansion in availability of renewable electricity technologies which has occurred over the last decade.  This expansion has been accompanied by a steep drop in the price of renewable energy technologies.  The most recent publications by the Energy Watch Group paint a very bright picture of the ability of renewables to meet all of the world's current energy demand and to replace fossil fuels in the industrial world's energy use mix.  So it doesn't appear that there will be a zombie apocalypse triggered by the collapse of global energy supplies.  This may disappoint a number of catastrophists, skinheads, far-Right "preppers" and other similar types, but c'est la vie.  My clarification may also take the thrill out of reading this post, but readers from now on can enjoy the milder pleasure of reading this post as a bit of interesting history.  

Over the last two weeks the price of WTI crude oil has dropped from around $146 per barrel to just over $129 per barrel. This is partly due to the most recent EIA Weekly Report published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which showed that U.S. commercial crude oil inventories (excluding those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve) increased by 3 million barrels during the week ending 11 July 2008. Also, total motor gasoline inventories increased by 2.4 million barrels during the same period, on top of a 900,000 barrel increase during the previous week. These numbers seemed to confirm the pronouncements of many market “analysts” stating that a slowing U.S. economy would reduce overall petroleum demand, driving prices lower. Lower oil and gasoline prices also led to a Wall Street stock rally late this week. The financial news media headlines covering these developments sounded a celebratory note, as if to say, “See! Things aren't that bad after all. We're returning to normal. Happy times are not far away!”

I have a different interpretation of these events; namely, that we are experiencing one of the aspects of life on the “bumpy plateau.” For those who study peak oil and theorize about how it will play out, the bumpy plateau has two meanings. The first meaning has to do with absolute quantities of petroleum liquids produced worldwide on a daily basis. Many peak oil watchers have theorized that as the world reached a peak of oil production, the peak would not be sharply defined, but would consist of several months of production fluctuating in small “bumpy” increments around a maximum average “plateau” number, before beginning to irreversibly decline. That is what we have been seeing since May 2005, as we have bumped a few percent or so above and below an average figure of 85 million barrels of petroleum liquids per day. The major oil companies and many national governments are struggling desperately to increase this number significantly, yet are failing, because the new oil projects they bring on stream can't offset production declines from old fields that are now at a point of exhaustion.

But the second bumpy aspect of the bumpy plateau has to do with price. When worldwide daily petroleum production cannot grow, the price of oil rises, because the worldwide “official” economy is based on the expectation of continuous growth at a certain percentage per year. Oil is the foundation of the majority of that economy, and no business or government wants to shrink, so corporations and institutions who want the oil begin to offer ever-larger sums of money for that oil. But as the things made with that oil become too expensive for the end users – little people like you and me – to afford, the demand for products made with oil drops, because people are forced to do without. Thus the price of oil begins to drop – even though the underlying fact of limited oil supply hasn't changed.

Human nature being what it is, most people don't grasp the significance of the original rise in the oil price. That price rise should serve as a signal and a wake-up call telling us that it is time to make a permanent shift to a lifestyle and a society that doesn't rely on oil, a society that is learning to live well on less. Most people, including the masters of the present global economy, are not receptive to this message because they only think in the short term. They will doubtless think that the recent drop in petroleum prices means that our present oil “crisis” is purely temporary. The drop in price will therefore spur more consumption, driving demand back up and causing another rise in prices to a level which again reduces demand, driving the price down again, and kicking off another price rise cycle. Each price spike in the cycle is higher than the last, and each price drop is shallower than the last as time passes.

I believe I saw a personal example of short-term thinking this week. For the last few months I have seen fewer and fewer large SUV's and monster trucks on the road. But two days ago as I was waiting for the bus, I saw someone driving what looked like a new Chrysler SUV; I think it's called an “Aspen.” If you look it up on line, you'll find that it comes with either a 4.7 liter, 303 horsepower engine, or a 5.7 liter, 335 horsepower HEMI engine. The thing's as big as a Chevy Suburban! You can have one new for around $32,000 if you want one. But why would anyone want such a thing at a time like this?

This particular SUV went by me so fast that I couldn't see the face of the person driving it, but I have to wonder what was going through the person's head when they bought it. Had the mainstream media in this country done such a good job of turning this supposedly adult American into an unreflecting, impulsive child? And what does this say about the Chrysler Corporation, that at a time of constrained oil supply and spiraling gasoline prices, when people are resorting to desperate measures to unload their Suburbans and Excursions and Yukons and Expeditions and Tahoes, Chrysler comes out with a brand new SUV? They deserve to go bankrupt.

What's needed during this journey along the bumpy plateau is a long view, an ability to grasp the big picture of what's going on. This is an important part of the process of preparing for a more difficult future. The fact that the crisis may ease somewhat at times does not mean that the crisis is temporary. Those who are wise will remember this, and undertake the necessary steps to learn to live more simply, to harden their bodies to do difficult things and to endure adversity, and to explore all their options for preparing for the coming times. As time passes, those who refuse to prepare will be left with fewer and fewer options, until at last their options are bitter.

Speaking of hardening oneself, my commute to work used to consist of riding the light rail to a bus stop, then switching to bus over a hilly two-lane road route, and riding my bike the last mile and a half to work. The evening commute consisted of riding the bus over the same hilly two-lane road from my office to the morning bus stop, then riding my bike home. Total miles per day on the bike were around ten. But when gas prices went over $3.75 or so per gallon, I found that the bus bike racks were often full, and I began to have to ride a lot farther. It seems that many people are discovering alternative transportation, as many buses now have full bike racks in the morning, no matter which route one wants to take.

But riding more has been good for me. When I first started riding the hilly roads between the light rail stop and my office, I hated it. On particularly steep portions of the road, I would get off and push the bike uphill – while young men on racers and pretty, athletic women passed me or went screaming down the opposite side of the road. I remember one afternoon when a smart-aleck guy rode past me shouting “My gears are lower than yours!” as I was walking my bike uphill.

I suppose I could blame my softness on age; after all, to quote a poet I read a while ago, “Time grates my life and yours to sand.” But I'm not that old, and I refuse to act even as old as I am. So for the last two months, I've been forcing myself to ride over that blasted road both ways, and for the last two weeks I have been able to pedal the whole way in the morning without getting off the bike. And on the return trip, I twice pedaled all the way from my office to the light rail station without getting off. My body, which used to protest, “Help! I'm dying!” now takes hills with the attitude that it ain't nothin' but a thing... I've even left a few riders behind. Now I'm racking up at least 100 miles a week on my bike, and my truck is used mainly as a place to dry vegetables (I got the idea from Sharon Astyk's blog).

I'll leave you with a picture of some alternative transportation, for those who are interested and who might be short on cash. It's a bargain, but I don't know how well it handles hills.

Pavlov's Politics

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov was a Russian physiologist, psychologist and physician who lived from 1849 to 1936. He is famous for his investigations of conditioned reflexes in animals, which arose from his observation that dogs who were habitually given food coated with chili powder tended to salivate when they saw the food coming, before it actually entered their mouths. Through a series of experiments he learned to induce salivation in dogs by presenting various signals that accompanied the feeding of the dogs. Thus he was able to “train” dogs to salivate by doing such things as ringing a bell or blowing a whistle. Other scientists applied his research to human psychology, deducing that humans could be trained to produce conditional reflexes or responses to events or triggers that often had nothing to do with the response produced. One such scientist, William Sargant, was part of a CIA research program in brainwashing and mind control that was carried out in the 1950's and 1960's. And the dogs originally used by Pavlov in his experiments became famous in a wry sort of way. To call someone a “Pavlov's dog” is to accuse that person of merely reacting to a situation rather than using critical thinking.

The American political process has largely become Pavlovian. Average Americans are being treated like Pavlov's dogs by the powers that be, from the corporate interests who really run things to the leaders of both major parties and the media outlets who provide us with “news.” There was a time, not very long ago, when the two parties actually stood on two sides of many important issues, and the media sympathetic to one side presented a message that was clearly different from the media voice of the other side. On the Right were Nixon, Jesse Helms, big business, defenders of the status quo, and those who were intolerant of people of other cultures and races. On the other hand were the Kennedy and post-Kennedy Democrats, the environmentalists, the radicals, the challengers of big business injustice and those rock musicians who were politically outspoken.

But the dangerous voices of the 1960's that threatened the status quo of corporate America were gradually co-opted and corporatized. And the very definitions of “Left” and “Right” were subtly changed to remove any threat to the major corporate interests. This re-definition was carried out in earnest during the 1980's and 1990's, and it involved two things: first, changing the meaning of “Left” and “Right” to meanings that posed no threat to the entrenched corporate interests controlling the largest sectors of the global economy; and secondly, the use of the media to heavily and constantly push this new “Left” and new “Right” on the American public until they accepted these as the actual and legitimate “Left” and “Right.”

This is clearly seen in the case of the Right. Those who preach Biblical morality, otherworldliness, simple living and the Sermon on the Mount have always posed a threat to established interests, from the days of the Civil War to the Civil Rights struggle of the 1960's. Therefore spokesmen such as James Dobson, the Moral Majority and the Family Research Council have worked to define Christianity and the Religious Right solely in terms of opposing sexual immorality, voting Republican and being patriotic – a much safer definition which does not threaten big business. Dobson and his associates have also attacked any Christians who suggest that perhaps we should widen our focus beyond sexual morality to include opposition to big business practices which harm the environment or poor people. This has led many on the Left to say, rather accurately, that the only issue about which the Right cares is sex.

But this accusation can also be leveled at the Left. Leftism used to mean advocacy of equal rights for all peoples of all ethnic groups; protection of the environment even if the price of such protection is that we must live more simply; restricting the power of corporations to prevent them from turning into monopolies or oligarchies; restricting the power and reach of the government; guaranteeing every citizen access to a free, participatory democracy, including the right to have one's voice heard by a free and independent press; and protecting the poor of the world from becoming victims of the rich.

But the corporate masters of American society noticed that many on the Left had become turned off to the religion and mores of the Right. So they began pushing a definition of Leftism solely as opposition to the religion and sexual morality preached by the Right. Thus, while actual progress in civil rights for minorities has stalled from the time of Reagan onward, the Left still insists that great progress in civil rights is being made, because of the fact that movies like Brokeback Mountain are now being made. Unfortunately, Brokeback Mountain isn't doing a lot of good for a number of black men now on death row or serving harsh sentences in various American prisons for crimes they didn't commit. Brokeback Mountain won't bring back any of the unarmed young black men gunned down by the NYPD over the last several years. Leftism has been redefined as the rejection of all sexual mores, the granting of permission to indulge in any sort of sexual desire, the bad-mouthing of biblical Christianity, and the abandonment of all standards of public decency, especially in the media. As with the re-definition of the Right, this re-definition of the Left does not threaten big business.

The final strategy used by these corporate masters has been to turn both the Democrats and the Republicans into mere empty symbols. The symbols may look different, but that means almost nothing, since both parties promote mostly the same policies. The Republican symbol is constructed on a foundation of memories of the Cold War and the struggle against “godless communism,” and it consists of a decorated war hero wrapped in an American flag, chewing tobacco and spitting while flexing a bicep tattooed with a cross or fish sign and declaring that he will “keep America strong!” This symbol is designed to produce a Pavlovian response at the voting booth among NASCAR-watching, Ford or Chevy truck-driving, beer-drinking high school dropout good ole' boys.

The Democrat symbol is constructed on memories of the 1960's and early 1970's, on memories of the Kennedy influence and the times when the Democrats were actually advocates of the little guy. It consists of a black man or a white woman, defined as “progressive” because they believe in “alternative spirituality,” they are “empathetic,” they are not perceived as evangelical conservatives, they support a “woman's right to choose,” they are vegetarian (maybe!) and they are the first of their kind to achieve high office. This symbol is also designed to produce a Pavlovian response at the voting booth. It worked quite well in 2006, when the Republicans showed themselves for what they really were – nothing more than the greedy, corrupt servants of a corporatocracy. We Americans knew we had been hoodwinked into an unjust war, and that we had been made into victims of a big business feeding frenzy, and many of us actually believed in the symbol of the Democrats as agents of change. This is what enabled the Democratic takeover of both houses of Congress. The only trouble is that events since then have proven that the Democrats are much bigger on talk than action.

The 2008 presidential election has degenerated into a battle between symbols, and “news” analysis and coverage of the campaigns has focused only on the effectiveness of these symbols. In the Democratic primary, one symbol (the one with the blond hair) tried to tear the other symbol apart (the one with the dark skin). It was fairly obvious to many that Hillary Clinton was really only a symbol, and that her entire campaign was a gamble that she would be an effective Pavlovian symbol (“Vote for me because I am a woman! A vote for me is a vote for progress, for that very reason!). John McCain is also nothing more than a symbol (Vote for me because I am a decorated Vietnam vet! The world is a dangerous place, and you need a tough guy in office!). I had begun to hope that Obama would be something more than a symbol, but recent news coverage of his shift to the “middle” on key policy issues has begun to erode my hopes.

The problem is, as I have stated before, that the global “official” economy which dominates the world is an unjust system which is now in the process of breaking due to the worldwide end of cheap oil. Yet while that system still exists and is in any way viable, its masters actively fight against anyone who seeks to create a safety net of alternative systems. Examples of this include automobile-based transportation, which for decades was pushed by rich corporations such as the Big Three automakers and the American oil companies. Now this system is breaking down, and the evidence is that more and more people cannot afford the money to use it. But there are few alternatives and they are difficult or dangerous to use, thanks to long-standing opposition to these alternatives from the auto and oil industries and by such people as former Republican congressman Tom DeLay, who fought against a light rail system for the city of Houston, Texas.

Other alternatives which are being opposed by vested corporate interests include small farms, which provide a viable option to factory-farm food which is becoming more expensive due to increasing energy costs, and is increasingly being recalled due to dangerous disease outbreaks. Urban self-sufficiency is under attack, as large agribusinesses persuade Federal and state departments of agriculture to oppose allowing people to keep backyard animals such as chickens, forcing them to rely on the factory food/supermarket distribution chain instead. NAFTA is yet another attack on our ability to take care of ourselves, yet another means of enabling large corporations to virtually enslave people in low-wage jobs without an adequate safety net of small businesses to which these people could turn.

I could go on and on with examples. The point is that what we need now in a President is someone who will protect us from the corporatocracy and who will not get in the way when local citizens try to disentangle themselves from this breaking system. I knew that Hillary Clinton and John McCain support the evil status quo, no matter how they try as symbols to portray themselves. The viciousness of their attacks on Obama made me think that perhaps he was someone who would actually upset the status quo and protect small Americans from big business.

But now he is reconsidering his earlier opposition to NAFTA; now he is willing to grant prosecution immunity to telecom companies who spied on Americans as part of the “War on Terror”; he has supported a Congressional bill that would give expanded wiretapping powers to the government; and he seems to be backing away from an immediate, swift withdrawal of troops from Iraq. In short, he is starting to look like the sort of candidate who would pose no danger to corporate interests.

If he's trying to get my vote, this is a dangerous strategy. I am black and I am an evangelical Christian; yet when I need an airline pilot, an optometrist or a surgeon, I care far less about his religion or skin color than I care about his qualifications. I'm not really thrilled about voting for Obama just because he's black. After all, Robert Mugabe is also black, as was Idi Amin. I'm not saying that Obama is as bad as these two; I'm just making a point. I can't understand the women who rabidly supported Hillary just because she was a woman (maybe the fact that I'm a guy has something to do with my lack of understanding.) Don't these women remember Jezebel? (1 Kings 21:23; 2 Kings 9:35-37)

At this dangerous and dicey juncture in American history, I care far less about a candidate's value as a symbol than I care about whether the candidate understands what needs to be done, and what that candidate will or will not do. I have been fooled too many times by people who sold themselves to me as symbols; I'm tired of people trying to fool me yet again. In 2004, this was also the view of 83 million people who were eligible to vote, yet who chose not to because they were tired of being treated like Pavlov's dogs.

Sources:

• “Obama Starts Moving To The Middle,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 3 July 2008, http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/369495_meansonline06.html

• “Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle is for Losers,” Real Clear Politics, 1 July 2008, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/memo_to_obama_moving_to_the_mi.html

• “Bird Flu: Officials Warn About Poultry Grown Outdoors,” KATU News, 14 March 2006, http://www.katu.com/news/3642286.html

• “Are Backyard Chickens Causing Bird Flu? Why a Ban of Backyard Fowl Would Be Ineffective in Preventing Bird Flu,” About.Com, http://infectiousdiseases.about.com/od/petslivestockandgame/a/backyard_chick.htm

• “Tom Delay,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_delay

• “Ivan Pavlov,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov#Reflex_system_research