Wow. Just, wow.

This is too funny

Would you buy an energy policy from this man?

FTFA:

"This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency."

Yes, that's why we're talking about solar, hydro-electric, nuclear, geothermal, tidal and wind. Obama mentioned solar as an example because the sun's energy is the most plentiful and easily harnessed, he didn't say "LET'S SWITCH ALL OUR POWER TO SOLAR, YA'LL!"

Idiot.

Holman Jenkins is a major league idiot. Amazing.

I bet you that the right wing pundits are engaged in a big bet to see how far they can take this thing before it all comes crashing down.

That, or they've all lost their farking minds since McCain lost the election to such a wide degree.

We don't really have the slightest idea how an increase in the atmosphere's component of CO2 is impacting our climate, though the most plausible indication is that the impact is too small to untangle from natural variability.

In any case, has Mr. Obama taken a gander at collapsing industrial


Wrong, Mr. Jenkins. You obviously know jack shiat about science.

Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler

Godwin'ed! You're a moron.

Wharrbgarrbl about the terrible plight of rich people and how they should get a nice big tax cut

What a shock, a right winger who thinks we need to give more money to rich people. Trickle down failed, you stupid fark. Stop repeating the same broken mantras of the last several decades. Learn something.

The public is different now -- the world is different -- and he will own the "Obama depression" sooner than he thinks.

Except that people with more than two brain cells to rub together know that this shiat started well before Obama took office.

Are mental midgets like Jenkins really the best the WSJ has to offer? Seriously? He sounds like every other member of the right wing echo chamber who only listens to his own party's fact deprived noise machine.f

When all you have is a hammer...

Nice way to miss quote a person Submitard. You sound like the NYT.

Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency.

A diversity of sources and/or suppliers would be great. But that doesn't mean that we have to be beholden a diversity of foreign sources and/or suppliers. You'd think neocon nitwit like this guy would be concerned about national security and foreign dependence.

crimsin23: Nice way to miss quote a person Submitard. You sound like the NYT.

That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

Diogenes: A diversity of sources and/or suppliers would be great. But that doesn't mean that we have to be beholden a diversity of foreign sources and/or suppliers. You'd think neocon nitwit like this guy would be concerned about national security and foreign dependence.

It's becoming clear by the day that the neocons are working for foreign powers.

what_now: /shamelessly stolen from a different godwined thread.

that exchange was so full of epic win that it still amuses me.

Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

I wonder if someone should point out to him that Churchill's energy solution was to run his economy on dirt-cheap Iranian oil thanks to exploitative oil contracts that large brisith oil campanies with the help of the British military had literally forced the Shahs of Iran to sign at gunpoint.

It was to protect this cheap oil flow that Churchill convinced Eisenhower (Truman had told him to pound sand) to send inthe CIA to overthrow Iran's first democratically elected government and return the Shah to power.

This more than anything else, is the main source of the probelms we are having with Iran today.


So...yeah...let's not use Sir Winston as our icon of sound energy policy shall we?

"God forbid somebody compare Obama to Hitler" and you wonder why people have a problem with it? Really?

crimsin23: Nice way to miss quote a person Submitard.

Who the fark is Miss Quote?

crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Oh please. Agreeing with Obama is hardly a canonization. And on this topic, he's absolutely correct. When he's wrong, I'll criticize. Secondly, it's a ridiculous comparison. It's about as capricious a Godwin as I've seen. And thirdly, it's a Fark headline, not a transcript.

crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

While I disagree with you on the basic premise, can I at least assume you consistently had no problem with people comparing George Bush to Hitler as well?

crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Just to point this out, Germany was the first country out of the great depression... Just because Hitler did it doesn't mean it is completely insane. I bet you woke up in the morning just like Hitler did every day of his life!

Blues_X: crimsin23: Nice way to miss quote a person Submitard.

Who the fark is Miss Quote?


Miss Manners' cousin...

Blues_X: Who the fark is Miss Quote?

Diogenes: Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency.

A diversity of sources and/or suppliers would be great. But that doesn't mean that we have to be beholden a diversity of foreign sources and/or suppliers. You'd think neocon nitwit like this guy would be concerned about national security and foreign dependence.



Should also be noted that both Hitler and Tojo were obessessed with "energy independence" during WWII when both countries, neither of which had any domestic sources of oil, suddenly found themselves needing it rather badly to fuel their war machines.


We usually don't call this "engergy independence" so much as "Strategic logistics"

crimsin23: God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do,

It's called Godwin Law of Debating: The first person to compare a political opponent to Hitler loses, because whatever this person wants to do, he probably doesn't have death camps set up somewhere.

Whenever someone compared Bush with Hitler, there would be a great cry of "GODWIN!! THAT IS A GODWIN! GOOD DAY, SIR"!

The same hold true to Obama. When you compare an energy policy you disagree with to systematically murdering large groups of people, you're argument becomes irrelevant and you are openly mocked.

flaEsq: When all you have is a hammer...

you make hammer-ade?

crimsin23: No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Please elaborate on how Obama and Hitler have / had similar goals.

Let's see...

Both Obama and Hitler were dealing with dire economic situations.
Both Obama and Hitler were good speakers.
Both Obama and Hitler were looked upon very favorably by their people.
Both Obama and Hitler were fascists that wanted to kill all of the Jews.

Don't quote me on that last one - I need to verify my sources first.

Diogenes: crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Oh please. Agreeing with Obama is hardly a canonization. And on this topic, he's absolutely correct. When he's wrong, I'll criticize. Secondly, it's a ridiculous comparison. It's about as capricious a Godwin as I've seen. And thirdly, it's a Fark headline, not a transcript.

I was talking about Subby, and that's still no reason to misquote someone.

Is this a step up or step down from comparing Obama to a chimp?

Blues_X: Who the fark is Miss Quote?

It would make for an interesting beauty pageant.

Miss Quote of the Year - 2009!

Ryan2065: crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Just to point this out, Germany was the first country out of the great depression... Just because Hitler did it doesn't mean it is completely insane. I bet you woke up in the morning just like Hitler did every day of his life!

Can you get with the thread please? I have no idea what you are talking about.

crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Attacking a policy on the grounds that it is similar to policy employed by a maligned source (in this case Emperor Tojo and Adolph Hitler) is a non-argument. The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the arguement away from energy security. Energy security is one of those things that is anathema to neo-conservatives because it precludes the need for military interventionism, a primary plank of neo-conservative foreign policy.

what_now: he probably doesn't have death camps set up somewhere.

It's only been 37 days! He can't fix EVERYTHING all at once! Yeesh!

Lando Lincoln: Both Obama and Hitler were fascists that wanted to kill all of the Jews.

Well, he is a secret muslim after all...

aden_nak: While I disagree with you on the basic premise, can I at least assume you consistently had no problem with people comparing George Bush to Hitler as well?

Do you know what happens when you assume?

Code_Archeologist: The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the argument away from energy security.

More of a red herring than a straw man.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Code_Archeologist: The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the argument away from energy security.

More of a red herring than a straw man.

More of a paranoid ranting than red herring.

crimsin23: Ryan2065: crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Just to point this out, Germany was the first country out of the great depression... Just because Hitler did it doesn't mean it is completely insane. I bet you woke up in the morning just like Hitler did every day of his life!

Can you get with the thread please? I have no idea what you are talking about.

So you don't think the only reason they threw Hitler in there was to try and invalidate the position even further? Here is what was said:

Put away the "energy independence" conceit. This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency.

What was the reason they brought Hitler up other than to try and get people to make the connection of Hitler was bad so this policy is bad?

SurfaceTension: Is this a step up or step down from comparing Obama to a chimp?

It's a step down. Obama does at least ostensibly have a passing resemblance to a chimp. His policies are absolutely nothing like Hitler's.

/that's how you troll

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Code_Archeologist: The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the argument away from energy security.

More of a red herring than a straw man.

You are correct, I am rusty on my informal fallacies.

what_now: It's called Godwin Law of Debating: The first person to compare a political opponent to Hitler loses, because whatever this person wants to do, he probably doesn't have death camps set up somewhere.

Whenever someone compared Bush with Hitler, there would be a great cry of "GODWIN!! THAT IS A GODWIN! GOOD DAY, SIR"!

The same hold true to Obama. When you compare an energy policy you disagree with to systematically murdering large groups of people, you're argument becomes irrelevant and you are openly mocked.

You are abusing Godwin's Law by distracting from the editorial board member's arguement.

I never compared Bush to Hitler. And objected when people did.
Columnist must be desperate if he is resorting to Godwinning this early on. I'll have to go listen to the speech again. Must have been even better than I thought.

crimsin23: You are abusing Godwin's Law by distracting from the editorial board member's arguement.

What argument? That Hitler and Tojo in a time of war, rationing, and blockade wanted energy independence, therefore we shouldn't pursue it ourselves? And that Churchill debunked it because Britain had colonized massive swaths of the Middle East and had a practically unlimited flow of cheap oil? You mean that argument?

Code_Archeologist: crimsin23: Diogenes: That's what you're taking away from this submission?!

No, I'm just tired of people treating Obama like he's some kind of saint. God forbid that someone compares what Obama wants to do to what Hitler wanted to do, and people start to miss quote that person.

Attacking a policy on the grounds that it is similar to policy employed by a maligned source (in this case Emperor Tojo and Adolph Hitler) is a non-argument. The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the arguement away from energy security. Energy security is one of those things that is anathema to neo-conservatives because it precludes the need for military interventionism, a primary plank of neo-conservative foreign policy.

Wrong. The writer gave a counter example of Churchill's theory on energy thereby negating the straw man argument.

Ryan2065: What was the reason they brought Hitler up other than to try and get people to make the connection of Hitler was bad so this policy is bad?

I don't know the reason, but what I know is that Godwin's Law is not absolute.

Code_Archeologist: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Code_Archeologist: The author was not trying to address the policy of energy independence but instead was trying to construct a straw man to distract the argument away from energy security.

More of a red herring than a straw man.

You are correct, I am rusty on my informal fallacies.

You could pretty much pick any one out of a hat for that article, though.

crimsin23: Wrong. The writer gave a counter example of Churchill's theory on energy thereby negating the straw man argument.

Actually he didn't. He said "This notion, a favorite of Tojo and Hitler, was debunked by Churchill, who reasoned that true energy security came from a diversity of suppliers, not the foolish pursuit of self-sufficiency."

He made no argument of his own, nor did he present any evidence that Churchill's argument is valid in the modern era. Or valid then.

Phase in a carbon tax. You'll see alternative energy become more attractive, and you can either replace lower the deficit, replace a portion of an existing tax, or give everyone a rebate.

i thought obama was a socialist? now he's a fascist?

Dead for Tax Reasons: i thought obama was a socialist? now he's a fascist?

He's really talented.

Hender: What argument? That Hitler and Tojo in a time of war, rationing, and blockade wanted energy independence, therefore we shouldn't pursue it ourselves? And that Churchill debunked it because Britain had colonized massive swaths of the Middle East and had a practically unlimited flow of cheap oil? You mean that argument?

No, the argument that history repeats itself. Britain was in much better shape after the war, and one can argue that the reason was that Britain had a diversity in its suppliers and did not rely on just themselves.