You are kidding me!

I'm glad you added the complete paragraph including the part about how this type of thing was also done by the Clinton administration.

Both sides do this.

I'm going to guess that (without reading the details in depth) the directives instituted are things that would hurt the Republican candidate if they had been brought up a month ago (even though McCain isn't Bush), and consequently well-read by opponents. (although, perhaps I'm just being cynical).

President Clinton had to ask congress to make an area a national park, but he needs no ones permission to take out his pen and declare a place a national monument. He declared a large section of Utah to be a national "monument", and thus, in the last days of his administration, he made one of the best US shale-oil reserves off-limits to drilling.

HOORAY!, you say (depending on your political views), but will you "hooray" when the exiting Bush/Cheney uses vaguely defined powers in a way that is disingenuous, and possibly blocks a major point of the Obama goals??

Over at the O-S site, there's a guy who's buying new Gen-III Prius replacement battery packs, and breaking them down into E-bike packs. $375 for a 44V pack that can put out 10C. Gets around the Chevron-Texaco/Cobasys patent restriction on large format NiMH's.

I believe that this patent (doesn't expire for two years) is a major restriction to the development of factory EV's, conversion kits, and plug-in hybrids (will China/India honor this patent, while we sit on the sidelines? Hint: they desperately need hard-currency exports).

I consider this a national security issue, and I HOPE (not holding my breath, here) that the next president uses presidential powers to over-ride the patent (just as President Wilson did with Wright-Curtiss).

Whether to block Obama goals, or to "take the blame" for some possibly unpopular McCain goals, the last two Bush/Cheney months should be "interesting" as the Chinese say...

Spinningmagnets, Thank you for a reply with substance and fact.

When I think about US History, I have to conclude that it was pure dumb luck that brought us here, but it was forthought, intelligence, and tenacity that has sustained us throughout the years. However, lately it seems we're running low on all of the above.

It there is an "interesting" point about the upcoming election, it is the simple fact that with such a huge expected voter turnout, we'll finally know whether or not this country is top heavy with intelligence or ignorance...and the rest of the world is waiting anxiously for that answer.

If the US ever in its history made a mistake that will eventually be its downfall, it will be that it gave non-working, non-tax paying citizens the right to vote. In my small world, if you don't pay my salary, you don't get to tell my how to do my job. Why does that not apply to our government?

The other mistake this country makes is perpetuating an embarrassingly poor education system so that it produces more and more of the self-indulgent, ignorant, and gullible citizenry who continue to vote fools into office. Hmm, so THAT'S why it is so bad!!

Hi Moccasin,

Unemployed shouldn't have a vote? It's kind of a return to the old days when only land owning men could vote. I see the appeal but there are some very good reasons we moved on from that.

I also think it was interesting to find out if we're top heavy with intelligence or ignorance. Maybe that's a too cynical thing to say. I've realized this week the fundamental flaw with the democratic party. They actually believe in rule by the people- that the electorate votes according to whats in their best interest that they arrived at by nuanced discourse. Reality is far from that. Most voters can't answer the most basic questions about the issues or candidates
Obama has run a very clean campaign, refusing to use the smear tactics used on him and trying to keep the focus on the issues instead of the personality. Doing this is a gamble, that people are more interested in policy debate then everything else. By stepping away from the smear campaigns, he forfeits a battle. He keeps everyone from thinking things about McCain like why he left his first wife who waited for him while he was a POW, how well an old man can run things (you don't see ailing businesses put in old men as CEOs) or his legendary temper, his role in the savings and loan crisis, or most critically in his most important decision of his campaign he picked Palin, someone he met only twice before. Even after eight years of Republican incompetence in the White House. Even though the Republican candidates have been the most pathetic group I've ever seen run in my life (conspiracy?), they still came within a hair of winning. It reminds me of the play The Producers, where the try to make Broadway flop, but accidentally make a hit.

To sum it up, the Democrats actually believe in rule by the people, that's their fundamental weakness. In reality its rule by the politician, who's goal is to create the largest emotional response in the general public. Someone they'd like to have beer with, someone who's more attractive. Obama got his edge from his legendary charisma alone, like so many leaders before him.