From Reuters: “House passes bill to sue OPEC over oil prices”
The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved legislation on Tuesday allowing the Justice Department to sue OPEC members for limiting oil supplies and working together to set crude prices, but the White House threatened to veto the measure.
The bill would subject OPEC oil producers, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Venezuela, to the same antitrust laws that U.S. companies must follow.
And if OPEC says “Go soak your collective head”? What then, O legislators?
PJM Home
The New Criterion
The Rape of the Masters: How Political Correctness Sabotages Art
Lives of the Mind: The Use and Abuse of Intelligence from Hegel to Wodehouse
Art’s Prospect: The Challenge of Tradition in an Age of Celebrity
Experiments Against Reality: The Fate of Culture in the Postmodern Age
Tenured Radicals, NEW, EXPANDED EDITION FALL 2008! How Politics has Corrupted our Higher Education
Counterpoints: 25 Years of The New Criterion on Culture and the Arts
The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America
Against the Idols of the Age
Lengthened Shadows: America and Its Institutions in the Twenty-First Century
The Survival of Culture: Permanent Values in a Virtual Age
Physics and Politics, by Walter Bagehot, edited with an
Introduction by Roger Kimball
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
9 Comments
1. vb:This is the same old, same old. Draft a UN resolution on women’s rights, sign a ceasefire with Saddam, negotiate an ineffective Kyoto protocol: without enforcement these things are worthless; try enforcement and you beome a pariah. I’d prefer that we sue the bloviators for destroying trees to publish their pipe dreams.
May 21, 2008 - 5:06 am 2. LSD:Exactly! “Stop it or I’ll hit you with my indignation!”
And, apparently, these followers of the faith have some holy text that informs them that the prohibition of drilling on domestic soil makes them better stewards of the planet.
May 21, 2008 - 7:36 am 3. Fresh Air:Roger–
Isn’t this the perfect “progressive” solution to the problem of higher oil prices?
1. Provides work for trial lawyers.
May 21, 2008 - 8:40 am 4. Stephen Skubinna:2. Congresscritters can say they are “doing something” about gas prices.
3. Establishes moral authority (Us versus OPEC).
4. Accomplishes nothing.
Well, I guess we’ll just boycott their stupid oil. That’ll show them.
After all, the Democratic Party claims descent from Thomas Jefferson, and Jefferson gladly crippled the fledgling US economy to demonstrate his disapproval of England and France and that icky war thingy they were having to determine whether Europe would live under Napoleonic domination. Since the current Republican Party is determined to avoid any suggestion that they are at all different in any way from the Dems I expect massive bipartisan consensus.
May 21, 2008 - 10:45 am 5. Alo Kievalar:What then?
Easy.
Just declare a “national security crisis” and nationalize all Arab wealth in the USA. After all, something like 95% of Arab and OPEC dollars actually reside within US banks.
(Where else would they put them? Zimbabwe or Bolivian banks? How ’bout Egyptian banks?]
OPEC and all may have us by the balls.
But we have them by the throat…and they know it. Some of us know it too, but aren’t saying much….just yet.
Saudi Aramco (the biggest oil company in the world) may now have a Saudi President and so on, but the critical and crucial strings are still being pulled from Houston……and they know that too.
—————–
PS: Linguistic Lesson specially for vb above:
The term: “same old, same old”
I’ve been seeing this term used more and more in blogs and so forth. You might be interested to know it’s origin – and that it’s being used incorrectly.
It’s actually “SAME-O, SAME-O”. This was a term used (and still used) by GI’s in Korea and Japan mimicking, I believe, a Korean language linguistic feature in which a word is said twice and ends in an -O, as kind of “baby talk”. The word is English “SAME” with the added “Oriental” – O to give it a colloquial twist to mean “it’s the same no matter what you do”. A professional linguist could explain it better than that, I’m sure, but my point is it’s not “same old, same old” (altho usage ultimately trumps grammar so “same old same old” may become widespread enough so that it becomes the standard.)
May 21, 2008 - 12:59 pm 6. Steve Skubinna:Alo, I first heard “same-o, same-o” the way you describe in the Navy and have used it that way ever since. A few years ago I started hearing, and seeing “same old, same old” and was puzzled since that was most definitely what I and my colleagues said.
Military people have an entire subset of slang corrupted from foreign sources. And it’s not just the US military, of course – my understanding of the manner in which “kaffir” became a taboo word for black in South Africa was that it had been picked up by British Army troopers from campaigns in the Sudan and Egypt, then carried down south. They were mocking their enemies by appropriating their insult, much as the US Marines call themselves Devil Dogs.
May 21, 2008 - 2:41 pm 7. Alo Kievalar:Steve S:
Yes, military “foreign” terminology forms an interesting and little known subject.
As you said, “KAFFIR” was used by the British forces in South Africa. It comes, of course, from the Arabic “kaafir” meaning “disbeliever”, that is, one who does not believe in Islam. (I doubt it is used at all in the British Army these days, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan…… although it would be hilarious if it were used).
Other interesting “Britishism” include the term “SHUFTI” meaning a look-see as in “Take a quick shufti and see if there’s anyone in that building”. This also comes from the Arabic (colloquial, in this case) SHUUF, meaning “to look, to see, to perceive” etc.
Finally, you might have heard of the Britishism TIFFIN meaning “tea time” or “break time”. This word is from an Indian sub-continent language, tho I’m not sure which one (probably Hindi or Tamil).
Whether any of the above terms are in current use, I don’t know. Probably not…..like the British “Empire”, their time has now passed and are most likely now considered quaint if understood at all, although I can’t be sure since I’m not British.
May 23, 2008 - 9:48 am 8. Peter Laverick:One British adoption from the Subcontinent is still in use, and that is “Khyber.” It is rhyming slang for arse (i.e. Khyber pass)
May 25, 2008 - 7:47 pm 9. John Ford:Congressional approval of suing OPEC makes about as much sense as Bush asking the Saudis to increase production and help out the Yanks. The next logical step would be to dispatch a bipartisan group of members of Congress along with the president to India and China to urge them to cut back on oil consumption.
It may not accomplish anything but at least our elected representatives will get to visit the Taj and the Great Wall. That’s about the most bang for our buck that we seem to be getting for our tax dollars these days.
May 26, 2008 - 12:04 am