QUEEG FOR A DAY
Re: Jeffrey Lord’s Hillary
Rodham Queeg:
Kudos to Jeffery Lord for his article on Hillary Clinton. Who,
possessing even the slightest knowledge of history and psychology,
could doubt that Hillary, with her deep-seated sense of
entitlement, her rage and frustration at having to play second
fiddle to her flawed husband, and her neurotic need for control,
would be a greater risk in the presidency than Richard Nixon?
— John C. Pechette
Indianapolis, Indiana
Even though the MSM did their best to cover-up and protect the
Clinton duo by not reporting, or downplaying accusations, or the
ole “critics suggest it may be part of a right-wing
conspiracy,” there was still enough out there for anybody looking
to see that these people were fouling the White House and using the
Presidency for their mad grab for personal gain. Even in Bill’s
final hours of frenzied issuance of pardons as payback for
political favors and co-defendants who took the fall for him the
MSM hardly batted an eye. Hillary as president….makes me shudder
every time I think of it.
— John Nelson
Hebron, Connecticut
Even the slightest thought of Hillary Clinton in the White House
scares the heck outta me. It was bad enough the first time with her
behind the scenes, but now thinking about her running the whole
country is scary. I hope that the voters of the United States will
let sanity and common sense rule and vote for FRED!
— J. Sherrill
Tennessee
I think Mr. Lord is too harsh on Queeg. One of the best speeches in
the book and movie was when the defense attorney defended Queeg at
the party after the verdict. He was a sad, tired officer who had
done his duty for too long. The same cannot be said for Hillary
Clinton.
— Lee Phelps
Brandon, Florida
After reading Jeffrey Lord’s article, and recalling all of the
events that occurred during the most corrupt presidential
administration in U.S. history, one thing is clear in my mind.
Hillary got a pass on every occasion because it was considered
impolite to attack the wife of a president. Sure, she was scorned
and berated by conservatives, and even the media raised an eyebrow
at her behavior, but this was light treatment. To the best of my
knowledge, she was never held legally accountable. She was never
arrested, fingerprinted, tried in court, fined, or served a day
behind bars. Knowing how close she is to bringing corruption back
into the White House, it stands as a hard lesson that criminals
should never be allowed to slip away free when caught. Otherwise
they will always resurface, bolder and better equipped. Had she
been properly dealt with then, we wouldn’t be hearing from her
today.
— Tom Cook
Raleigh, North Carolina
She’d behave very much the same as Lyndon Johnson in the White
House. He knew which closets had skeletons (most in Washington),
and wasn’t above using the threat of exposure to get votes the way
he wanted.
Hillary is a typical politician. Lie, cheat, steal, anything to
advance your cause, which is power and its furtherance. Any
committed liberal/socialist believes that only results are
important, not the method of achieving.
If she becomes president, God help us all.
— R. Goodson
This is an excellent, insightful piece, which needs to be expanded.
Good work!
— Walter Harding
Keep up the good work.
— R. Genovese
REFINERY TASTES
Re: Mark A. Michaelsen’s Refinery
Shortage:
There is so much wrong thinking in Mark Michaelsen’s piece that
it is hard to know where to begin, but I’ll try.
First he attempts to equate the nation’s refining capacity with
the number of refineries. Refineries come in all shapes and sizes.
The refineries that shut down since the '80s were mostly small
regional refineries that simply ran out of local crude supply, or
sham refineries that were thrown together to take advantage of the
Nixon/Carter price controls. (You will see a pattern develop here.)
Only a few old outmoded medium sized refineries in bad locations
were shut down. Even the best, most efficient refineries lost money
from the early '80s to the late '90s because there was too much
capacity.
The second wrong set of conclusions are related to reduced
gasoline and diesel fuel production in recent years. Both are a
direct result of government regulation. “Reformulated Gasoline,” a
government-dictated set of composition standards, reduced gasoline
yield by 5-10% depending on refinery configuration. Last year’s
ethanol mandate also decrease yield by the same 5-10%.
Diesel yield has been reduced by the new ultra low
(EPA-mandated) Sulfur content limit that recently went into
effect.
Anything catch your eye here? Yes, it’s the invisible hand of
Congress and the bureaucracy mandating what refineries can and
can’t do with their product. All of the mandates and regulations
have also significantly increased the cost of producing all of your
fuels.
One last economic lesson missed in the article. In the opening
paragraph, it is noted that when the Chevron refinery shut down, it
caused crude oil prices to rise. Now think about that. Refineries
consume crude, so a shutdown reduces demand. Yet the price of crude
rose. Sounds like a reason to look at the subsidized speculating
that goes on every day on the commodity exchanges.
— Glen Schorzman
Marsing, Idaho
Why don’t these states that have special gasoline formulations have
refineries in those states to produce their “special” fuel so the
rest of us don’t have to foot the bill.
It is time for Americans to take back our country from the
environmental nuts.
— Elaine Kyle
Why would reduced refinery production affect the price of crude
oil?
— Donald S. Sammis
Titusville, Florida
