McCain Turns the Clock Back to 1988 With Brilliant VP Pick

The McCain Argument: "Celebrity" is Bad, Experience is Critical

The GHW Bush Argument: "I Need a Handsome Young Running Mate Who Knows What a Checkout Scanner Does"

Whatever will Alaska do without a "hot" governor during the campaign?

Possible Obama assassination attempt already?

Back in February I wrote of many progressives' fear for Obama. Tonight, on the first day of the convention, it appears that a substantial plot has unraveled. These guys may turn out to be simply racist addicts, but nobody worried much about the right wing militias before OK City. Here's hoping the Secret Service and FBI have already infiltrated the rest of the nuts.

The wire story:

(CBS4) ― CBS4 has now learned at least four people are under arrest in connection with a possible plot to kill Barack Obama at his Thursday night acceptance speech in Denver. All are being held on either drug or weapons charges. [...]

The story began emerging Sunday morning when Aurora police arrested 28-year-old Tharin Gartrell. He was driving a rented pickup truck in an erratic manner according to sources.

Sources told CBS4 police found two high-powered, scoped rifles in the car along with camouflage clothing, walkie-talkies, a bulletproof vest, a spotting scope, licenses in the names of other people and methamphetamine. One of the rifles is listed as stolen from Kansas.

Subsequently authorities went to the Cherry Creek Hotel to contact an associate of Gartrell's. But that man, who was wanted on numerous warrants, jumped out of a sixth floor hotel window. Law enforcement sources say the man broke an ankle in the fall and was captured moments later. Sources say he was wearing a ring with a swastika, and is thought to have ties to white supremacist organizations.

A third man -- an associate of Gartrell and the hotel jumper was also arrested. He told authorities that the two men "planned to kill Barack Obama at his acceptance speech."

That man, along with a woman, are also under arrest.

The Secret Service, FBI, ATF and the joint terrorism task force are all investigating the alleged plot.

My June newspaper column: Price effects of gasoline

What price will change driving?

St. Cloud (MN) Times

June 4, 2008

It’s hard to have a conversation these days without someone bringing up the price of gas.

Monday’s national average of $3.97 for a gallon of regular is up 25 percent from a year ago. AAA is reporting a 15 percent increase in “out-of-gas” service calls as drivers try to avoid another costly fill-up by running on fumes. Car rental companies can’t keep compacts in stock and are pushing free SUV upgrades on travelers who don’t want them. New auto sales have declined 10 percent the past year, and market prices for used trucks and SUVs have dropped 15 percent across the board.

As $4 gas becomes the new norm, Americans are suddenly paying attention to the cost of driving as never before. Since 1998 the early June pump price for regular gas in St. Cloud has risen from $1.10 to $3.83. Corrected for inflation that’s a hefty 275 percent bump.

Anyone paying attention during that time would have easily noted that the price of gas was rising fairly steadily, and certainly should have noted the large jumps in 2000, 2004 and 2006, each of which saw June-June increases of 30 percent or greater.

But how many conversations about carpooling, buying smaller cars or switching to ethanol do you remember from the early summers of those years?

What we saw

When local gas prices increased 42 percent between June 2005 and June 2006 there were few car ads in the paper touting “HIGH MPG!” or recent model crew cab diesel pickups parked along the highway with “make offer” signs on the windows. But we’re seeing both now.

Some analysts have suggested the $4 threshold represents a psychological barrier that consumers just weren’t prepared to deal with, particularly those of us who remember $1 gas not that long ago.

But if we go back to the energy crisis of 1979, similar behavioral patterns appear. As prices skyrocketed and stations literally ran out of gas people bought more efficient cars, drove less, carpooled more and complained a lot.

The big psychological threshold for gas prices then was $2 rather than $4. In a Gallup Poll that spring only 26 percent said they would continue to drive to work if gas hit that mark.

Twenty-eight percent of respondents in another pool had to “drive around to find a station that had gasoline available” while another 18 percent drove less because they simply could not find gas to buy.

Conservation

The pain may not have been that bad though, as other surveys found 38 percent felt it would be “not at all difficult” to reduce their miles traveled by one quarter and fully 40 percent supported a law requiring people to reduce their driving by that much as a way to conserve gas.

But when the supply of oil increased and the price of gas dropped 47 percent between 1981 and the low point in 1988 such concerns were largely forgotten.

What’s different today is that there’s much less flexibility in the world supply to create another oil glut and push prices down in the United States.

We now import more than twice as much oil as we did in 1985, but the oil reserves of many exporting nations are producing far less than they did just a decade ago.

The big gains in automotive fuel efficiency realized in the wake of the energy crises of the 1970s tapered off in the 1990s as prices stabilized, Congress failed to follow through on conservation commitments, and consumers flocked to SUVs and minivans.

More people, more cars, more driving, less crude oil — the basic economics of supply and demand should tell us that $4 gas is not a fluke, but the first step toward a more expensive future.

We often hear anecdotes about $10 per gallon gas in Europe these days, usually presented as cautionary tales or “you think things are bad here” human interest stories. But at the same rate of increase we experienced in St. Cloud the past five years — when gas rose from $1.39 to $3.83 at the pump — we can reasonably expect to see $10 gas here by 2011.

When that happens will we be shocked and pretend it came without warning? Or is it finally time we take a serious look at our driving habits and begin planning for a future without cheap gas?

May column: conservation is possible

Here's my May column from the St. Cloud (MN) Times. Props my friends in Juneau, AK for showing us all how conservation works!

---------------------

May 7, 2008

Forget shopping, conserve

By Derek Larson

Americans rank among the world’s worst energy hogs, consuming roughly double the amount per capita of residents of other nations enjoying a similar standard of living.

This is due in part to the size of our country and a relatively low population density. But it also reflects an apparent inability to invest in efficiency, control waste, or respond to shortages with anything other than demands for increased production.

However, as oil hit $120 per barrel this week, signs that Americans are changing their habits have begun to emerge. Sales of large trucks are down, while smaller, more fuel-efficient cars are hot again. People are driving less and looking to save energy at home. Polls reflect growing anxiety about energy security and household budgets.

Gas prices alone are helping Americans attempt something they haven’t done since the 1970s: seriously try to use less energy. During the 1973 oil crisis Americans responded to exploding energy costs with imagination. Gas prices high? Join a car pool and reduce the speed limit to save fuel. Electricity skyrocketing? Shut down commercial lights at night. Fuel oil too dear? Turn down the thermostats in public buildings. Many of these changes became permanent.

When a second oil crisis hit in the wake of the Iranian revolution in 1979, the price of crude oil shot to a record that was not matched until March. The easy changes had already been made, so when Jimmy Carter spoke about energy conservation he wore a sweater, sat in front of a fireplace, and told us “There is simply no way to avoid sacrifice.” But few made the sacrifices he called for and some believe that speech cost him reelection.

Not long after Ronald Reagan was elected oil prices plummeted and remained low for 20 years. We became accustomed once again to cheap energy, gorged ourselves on SUVs and McMansions, and turned our backs on those who warned it could not last. When the price of gas shot up on Sept. 12, 2001, President Bush did not tell us there was no way to avoid sacrifice; he told us to go shopping. Detroit offered interest-free loans on SUVs and soon we were rolling again. But it could not last.

Today gas prices are pushing $4 a gallon on the West Coast and may hit $5 this summer. Public faith in the Bush administration’s energy strategy, which emphasizes production increases, is low; 66.5 percent rated his performance on energy “poor” in a March Gallup Poll. The same poll found 82 percent of Americans worried about the cost of energy, and a solid majority — 61 percent — thought that conservation by consumers was the best way to address the problem.

What remains to be seen is not whether we can learn to conserve energy again, but whether we are willing to try. Recent evidence from Alaska suggests we are.

An avalanche tore out the transmission lines connecting the capitol city of Juneau to its hydroelectric energy source last month, creating an instant energy crisis as the city shifted to diesel backup generators. The cost of fuel has driven the electric rate to 54 cents per kilowatt hour, or almost seven times what most Minnesotans pay. Local stores quickly sold out of compact florescent light bulbs, clothes pins, and even lamp oil. Almost immediately consumption dropped by 35 percent and has stayed low since largely through voluntary conservation measures.

Though the lines will eventually be restored, many residents are saying their new habits are here to stay — and will save them money even after the rates return to normal.

The reality is that we are nearing the end of the era of cheap energy. Whether it’s due to growing demand, shortages in supply, or some sort of carbon tax, prices are trending upward. We can respond by wringing our hands and cursing the oil companies, or we can chose to take action by wasting less.

The residents of Juneau have shown us it can be done without major sacrifices. Those of us who remember the 1970s also know it’s possible to cut back when you have to. As the price of gas approaches $5 this summer and electric rates continue to climb, here is hoping Americans respond by doing something other than going shopping this time.