Comments (16)

• rob

  It's almost 5% now......I think you started something!

  Published: January 19, 2007 11:03 PM

• Sudha Shenoy

  It was upto 5.97% just now, when I voted.

  Published: January 20, 2007 12:07 AM

• Dirk

  Now at 7.55%.

  Published: January 20, 2007 2:25 AM

• Stefan Karlsson

  Now it's over 10%, an increase probably in part caused by readers of this blog that followed your link.

  Published: January 20, 2007 8:23 AM

• Matthew

  Around 15% now. Looks like those "liberals" might just win! Is there anything more sad then people who think everything fits neatly into some liberal-conservative dichotomy? Statism is a cancer regardless of its leanings.

  Published: January 20, 2007 2:07 PM

• Brent

  16.4% now... why is the default selection "yes"? why is there a default selection?

  Published: January 20, 2007 3:41 PM

• Bill

  It is now a massive 5 fold increase to over 16%.

  And on the same website this I found this posting by a Nathaniel Ward:
  D’Souza pointed out, though, that the consequences of retreat from Iraq would be far more severe than the humiliation of leaving Vietnam. Not only would it embolden our enemies, but, for better or worse, “our way of life depends a lot on Middle Eastern oil.”

  What a bunch of crap. Our way of life depends a lot on Middle Eastern oil? We depend nothing on oil. In fact if it wasn't for the "Conservative" boob in the White House interferring with the process of free market innovation we would be well on our way to freeing ourselves from oil dependence.

  At least we could leave Iraq with the only things lost: 600Billion dollars, 3000 American lives, 50000 plus Iraqi lives and some hurt pride. This is of course true until the conservatives invent some other reason to keep getting people killed and spening money in Iraq.

  Published: January 20, 2007 4:44 PM

• Dennis Sperduto

  “[O]ur way of life depends a lot on Middle Eastern oil.”

  I believe oil is the major reason why the U.S. has intervened in the Middle East for a significant part of the 20th and 21st centuries. Of course, oil is absolutely no justification for this country's interventionism and imperialism, but at least D’Souza is being up front about the motive.
  

  Published: January 20, 2007 8:01 PM

• Bill

  I disagree. The only reason for any use of Middle Eastern oil is that it is simply and solely cheaper than other alternative oil sources, conservation or getting a substitute. In other words it is up to entrepreneurs to find other sources, develop systems that use less oil or an alternative to oil, or a combination of all the above.

  It is equally unfortunate that our current elected representatives (overlords), believe the dependence argument. They feel they have to spend our lives and money in an array of endless affairs designed to "protect" this oil that we do not even own. These government provided solutions (violent) cause more problems than they solve and actually make oil less available. (Iraq produces less oil now than before the US invasion.) Furthermore, the one size fits all solutions kill the incentive for entrepreneurs to do their job and make us less “dependent” on this Middle Eastern oil.
  

  Published: January 20, 2007 8:33 PM

• Sol Rosenberg

  The top two sources of US crude oil imports? Canada and Mexico. Those two countries combined provide more of US crude oil imports than the entire Middle East combined.

  As long as there's oil left on this earth it will be available at some price.

  Published: January 21, 2007 2:43 AM

• DavidB

  If the US pulls out of Iraq would they not be admitting defeat and that the US government was wrong in its actions? If that is so does anybody think the citizens of Iraq would have legal recourse against the US government and its citizens for perpetrating this 'crime' on their nation?

  Published: January 21, 2007 5:43 AM

• jeffrey

  DavidB, do you mean does Iraq have the resources to undertake a shock and awe military campaign against the US, drive the government into hiding, try and execute the head of state and then stick around for a couple of years to enforce martial law in the name of liberating this country from the grip of imperialists? I wouldn't think so.

  Published: January 21, 2007 6:21 AM

• Dennis Sperduto

  Yes, the U.S. does obtain a significant portion of its imported crude oil from areas other than the Middle East. However, crude oil is a worldwide commodity and priced as such, and given the vast, comparatively low-cost Middle Eastern reserves, output from this area is a very significant determinant of the worldwide price of oil.

  I think the issue is more one of price than of the availability of crude oil.

  And as I stated previously, "oil is absolutely no justification for this country's interventionism and imperialism" in the Middle East.

  Published: January 21, 2007 6:25 AM

• DavidB

  I'm talking about suing the US government in the courts. Either in the US or in some other jurisdiction

  Published: January 21, 2007 6:32 AM

• The Dirty Mac

  19.51% this morning.

  Published: January 21, 2007 6:40 AM

• Sione Vatu

  You mean like War Crimes Trials.

  That's an idea that really concerns members of the administration- it scares the entire government. They've consistently held the line that no member of the US military would ever be allowed to be put on trial by an international war crimes body. One can imagine that goes double for members of the govt itself. Imagine the precedent it would set!

  Sione
  

  Published: January 28, 2007 12:27 PM