Send in the Marines!

Send in the Marines!

President Bush exploring creation of massive marine sanctuaries in Pacific

On Monday, President Bush took the first step toward protecting three unique marine areas in the Pacific Ocean that are under U.S. jurisdiction, including waters around the Mariana Islands, Rose Atoll in American Samoa, and other coral reefs and atolls in the central Pacific. If all of the proposed areas are eventually protected, it would add 891,000 square miles of marine sanctuaries and/or national monuments to U.S. waters. Bush has not yet indicated what type of protection the areas will receive, if any, but he directed his cabinet on Monday to look closely at the three areas and explore the implications of such designations. Even if the areas eventually receive special status, commercial fishing, oil and gas drilling, or deep-sea mining could still occur in the protected areas unless they are specifically prohibited by Bush; environmental and conservation groups are lobbying hard for such prohibitions. One of the areas under consideration for protection is the deepest spot in the world’s oceans, the Mariana Trench, which reaches a depth of some 36,000 feet.



Why isn’t President Bush campaigning for McCain?

Posted: 05:00 PM ET


Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

Of all the differences between Barack Obama and John McCain, here’s one that could really make a difference down the home stretch: One has a president to help him and the other one does not. And at first glance, it’s not what you might think.

After his appearance with Barack Obama tonight at a rally in Kissimmee, Florida, former president Bill Clinton plans to criss-cross the country on behalf of Obama in the closing days of the campaign. Tonight will mark President Clinton’s first joint appearance with Obama on the campaign trail. Despite his lukewarm support at first,President Clinton as well as Hillary Clinton will campaign hard in the next few days to help Obama try to close the deal.

Watch: Cafferty: Cafferty: Bush support McCain?

But what about John McCain? He has a sitting president in his party. President Bush has been dubbed “the invisible man” when it comes to campaigning for his dear friend and fellow Republican, John McCain.

Here’s my question to you: President Clinton is campaigning for Barack Obama. Why isn’t President Bush campaigning for John McCain?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Garth writes:
Bush campaigning with McCain and Palin? You can’t be serious. This would be a real comedy show– two comedians and one sidekick, McCain. Bush couldn’t help a class leader get elected with his pitiful record. Isn’t it a real pity that a sitting president cannot be of any help to the candidate from his own party seeking to succeed him?

Kathy writes:
Jack, John McCain doesn’t need President Bush by his side as he has “Anchorage Annie” as his VP pick who is even more extremist, right fringe-minded. However, it would be a wonderful October Surprise if the President would call a prime-time news conference to remind all of us of his endorsement of McShame.

Ian from Fairfax, Virginia writes:
Well Jack, simply put, it’s Bush. I think the best way Bush can help McCain is staying out of his campaign.

Derek from Toronto, Ontario writes:
Bill Clinton did so much good for the economy and secretly wishes he could have run again. George Bush has done so little for the economy and secretly wishes he could just run away

Nora from Corpus Christi, Texas writes:
I think it is horrible the way McCain has thrown George W. Bush under the bus because of this election. I would have been more impressed with McCain if he would have said, Yes, I voted for Bush and I have agreed with him 94% of the time, but now I see we have to take the country in a different direction. Shame on you, McCain. You really are not loyal to anyone right now, are you?

Cee writes:
President Bush’s feelings are still hurt because McCain only agreed with him 90% of the time. He wanted 100%.

Brian from Clearwater, Florida writes:
President Bush campaigning for Senator McCain would be like Senator Stevens of Alaska endorsing Sarah Palin for Vice President. I would rather have the coal in my stocking at Christmas.

Obama on Yucca

Obama on Yucca

Wed, Aug 13, 2008 (2:01 a.m.)

That John McCain is a fervent backer of Yucca Mountain is not in dispute.

So it was hardly surprising that Barack Obama’s first Nevada-specific ad of the cycle would be on the subject near and dear to every candidate who comes to Nevada and every media person who works here, but perhaps not so top of mind to those seeming irrelevancies known as voters.

What is surprising, however, is that the part of an interview with McCain highlighted in the ad, designed to indicate that the Arizona senator balks at shipping nuclear waste through his home state but is fine with its rolling down Nevada’s highways, appears to be quite unfair to the Republican. And that is no one’s fault but McCain’s.

Watching the interview with Sam Shad of “Nevada Newsmakers” from May 2007, it’s apparent McCain simply misunderstood his interlocutor. I don’t suggest that the Obama campaign realized this — although it is pretty obvious — but the exchange is truncated in the ad.

Check for yourself at (search for McCain), but I will save you the trouble if you prefer not to surf. Here’s the exchange in the ad:

Shad: “Would you be comfortable with nuclear waste coming through Arizona on its way, you know going through Phoenix, on its way to Yucca Mountain?”

McCain: “No, I would not. No, I would not.”

But the actual interview has McCain quickly saying all in one breath in answer to Shad’s query, “No, I would not. No, I would not. I think it can be made safe.”

Now why would McCain emphasize how the waste “can be made safe” if he weren’t trying to emphasize he would have no worries about the substance passing through Phoenix? Obviously, he thought Shad was asking him whether he felt comfortable with waste going through Arizona and answered too quickly. So the central point of the ad — that McCain would be wary of it in Arizona but not in Nevada — is simply false.

Now the irony gets richer: The reason McCain was so obviously saying exactly the opposite of what the ad says is because he was trying to show why he is so supportive of Yucca Mountain.

(And even richer: Shad is trying to get the ad pulled because “it is an attack without full context on Sen. McCain.”)

He had previously told Shad “that we have to have a waste repository and that Yucca Mountain is the place it can be made safe.” He also said if the dump doesn’t happen, “we will have a more dangerous situation in my point of view,” with on-site storage, which he called a threat to national security.

The man, quite simply, loves the idea. Or did in May 2007 before he was the presumptive nominee and needed the state he ignored last year. Now he is trying to fudge a little by saying it has to meet “the environmental and safety standards that are necessary,” as he told KLAS-TV’s Mark Sayre over the weekend. That’s the same “sound science” sop — and a meaningless one — President Bush and many others have used.

McCain simply was demonstrating his Yuccalove in that Shad interview, so of course he would be comfortable with nuclear waste going through Arizona. Why? It can be made safe!

Obama’s position on the dump also is worth noting here vis-a-vis the ad, which declares the Democratic contender “opposes opening Yucca.” Indeed, he has said so, although what he can do if it is licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is questionable.

Obama has no record of relevant votes on Yucca Mountain — he was not there for any of the Screw Nevada Bill iterations, nor for the final 2002 votes that sealed the deal with President Bush leading the way and Congress following.

Obama is full of promises and as Hillary Clinton — or is it McCain? — would say, he can give a good speech on Yucca Mountain, but how would he have voted? Remember Illinois is chock-full of nuclear plants and Obama’s ties to Exelon, a major contributor to his campaigns, have been documented in The New York Times and elsewhere. I am not sure that even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could have persuaded Obama to oppose Yucca had the presidential hopeful been in the Senate in 2002.

So with McCain, you pretty much know what’s going to happen on Yucca and with Obama it’s a gamble — a microcosm of the election, from some perspectives at least.

One last note on this subject: Even more than a year ago, McCain’s electoral calculation is clear when he reminded Shad, “The president of the United States supported Yucca Mountain and he was able to carry Nevada in the last election.”

We will soon know whether history repeats.

Las Vegas Sun

NRDC: Energy Policy Meltdown: Bush Administration and Oil Shale

NRDC: Energy Policy Meltdown: Bush Administration and Oil Shale
NRDC Reacts to Department of Interior Oil Shale Announcement

By: Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

WASHINGTON, DC (July 22, 2008) – In a potentially disastrous plan that would destroy large tracts of the Rocky Mountain region, the Bush administration today announced its draft regulations for opening 2 million acres of public lands in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah for commercial oil shale production, according to experts at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

The following are statements from Amy Mall, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Senior Policy Analyst regarding today’s announcement:

“Our addiction to oil has gotten so bad that the Bush administration is considering cooking rocks as an energy solution. By putting out long-term oil shale production regulations, they are proposing that we swap oil for water in the Rockies. There is a better way. We can use the resources we already have more efficiently, such as doubling the fuel economy performance of our vehicles which would be the same as cutting gas prices in half.”

“Instead of smart investment in clean, efficient energy for the long term, this proposal offers false hope and hollow promises to everyday Americans who are struggling with energy gas prices. This is more evidence that President Bush has no intention of curing-as he calls it-‘the country’s addiction to oil.'”

“Some of our largest oil companies have stated that current research efforts into oil shale will not produce any tangible results for decades. It is impossible for a government agency to develop sensible regulations for an unknown industry, and a waste of taxpayer dollars.”

“The technological hurdles to actually cook oil out of rock are enormous. We have limited understanding of the long term impacts of this process, aside from destroying some of America’s great landscapes and sucking up the most valuable commodity in the West-water.”

NRDC analysis confirms that a commercially viable oil shale industry would have enormous environmental impacts. Oil shale production is expected to emit four times more global warming pollution than production of conventional gasoline-making it the dirtiest fuel on the planet. It could require as much water as almost 1.5 million people use in one year, a threat to an arid region that depends on every drop of water. Because oil shale will be far more costly to produce than conventional fuel, commercial oil shale development may not even reduce gas prices.

The Bush administration should be offering positive solutions to Americans, such as incentives to keeping vehicles properly maintained and using transportation alternatives one day per week, which can save the average driver about $800 on gasoline per year. For more information on solutions, rather than false promises, see:


President Bush Passes a Bill giving himself and his whitehouse retroactive immunity for possible war crimes!
Don’t you wish we could all do that? NO WAY I WOULD BE A CRIMINAL!