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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.