I have always believe that the dramatic increase in the price of oil is not just due to supply and demand. I mean the price has almost double in one year and the demand certainly has not gone up that much. As I mentioned before a lot has to do with speculation in the futures market. Some has to do with the weakness of the dollar. But I had no way of figuring exactly how much each factor was worth. Today on ABC news some expert quantify this for me. I don't know how accurate these figures are and I am sure even the best economists can't be sure. The current price is over $135 per barrel. According to their calculation, if it is just a matter of supply and demand the price should be about $75 per barrel. This would be about 7% increase from a year ago which is reasonable given the increase in demand. But this report said that specualtion adds $30 to a barrel and the weakness of the dollar adds $20. This still leaves $10 due to various causes. I think this is a reasonable calculation. One news item that show that speculation had an impact was that last week China announced that it would decrease subsidy to gasoline and thus increase retail price. This would eventually decrease demand. But the demand obviously did not decrease overnight as the price increase had not gone into effect yet. Nevetheless the next day the price went down more than $4 per barrel, indicating that the speculators are anticipating the decrease in demand and thus lower the bids. A true supply demand market would not have changed the price that quickly.

In a related item, three law school professors wrote in the LA Times that we should sue OPEC for fixing prices. I already wrote before condemning Congress for suggesting we should sue OPEC. Of course, Congress is made up mostly of lawyers and so we should not be surprise. Think about it, what right do you have to demand that someone sell something they have for a price that you like? If we have the oil reserve like they do, would we sell it to other countries at a price they want, as much as they want? Eventually the oil will run out and countries like Saudi Arabia are trying to maximize their profit just like anyone else would. They have an interest of not letting price go so far up that other countries would turn to alternative energy sooner. What makes anyone think that they would pay even if they lose in court? They would just ignore us and make more deals with China and India. We have three ways to drive down OPEC prices: make quick progress in alternative energy, decrease usage, or use military force. You decide.

I don't think the allegations from former referee Tim Donaghy that referees purposely made call that ensure a 7th game in the 2002 playoffs are credible. The NBA always have a reputation that the game is not called fairly and thus can be fixed. I think everyone would agree that the stars get the call 90% of the time when going up against a mediocre player. In a game where a lot of the fouls can be called either way, it is a big advantage for the stars. Most of the time it is not a directive from the league to help a player but referees are human beings who give the better player the benefit of the doubt. So I don't buy that there is a conspiracy theory. If there was, I would think the Knicks would be doing much better.

But I do have trouble with the way Yao Ming had been treated since coming to the NBA. Before Yao the European players who came to the league always seem to get the worst calls. Maybe it is because they play the game differently than the American players and the referees are not use to seeing their moves. When Yao started in the league, I thought he was getting favorable treatments. This is in contrast to other foreign players before him. I always suspected that since China is a big market that the league is trying to get into, they want Yao to succeed badly. While he was adjusting to the pace of the NBA some of the awkward moves that can be called fouls or travels were ignored. Was there a directive? Who knows. But when Yao got to superstar level, he did not get the calls that would be expected for a superstar. Certainly the things that Shaq got away with, Yao did not get away with in the last couple of years. Could there be a directive to let him be good, but not too good?

Well, maybe this is all speculation and nonsense. Let's get back to watching the NBA finals between the Kevin McHale Celtics and the Jerry West Lakers!

p.s. since last night when I wrote this and could not get it publish for some reason, the Celtics have won the finals. Paul Pierce is named the MVP but we all know that Kevin McHale is the real MVP!

Finishing up on the vp situation from the last blog before moving on to a lighter topic today. While I agree with LBOAYM about Obama not picking someone from the midwest, one should consider Ohio governor Ted Strickland. Ohio is an important swing state and Strickland was a Clinton supporter. Plus a senator-governor combination is generally better than a ticket with both being in the same type of office. In McCain's case I think he will strongly consider Romney because he would be helpful in Mich. and Mass. Romney also has lots of money. But I think they don't like each other much and the conservatives are not sold on Romney. Huckabee will help with the south but if McCain can't win the south himself, he is not going to win anyway. Huckabee would be a liability outside of the south. I don't see Rice as a viable candidate because that would validate Obama's claim that McCain would be Bush's third term. I see Charlie Crist, the governor of Florida and the governor of Minnesota, whose name escapes me now, as the likely candidates for McCain. By the way, Anthony Zinni got mentioned today by David Gergen on CNN as a possible candidate, the first I have heard of that in the media.

In my Nov. 9, 2006 blog I talked about athletes in politics. Al Franken's endorsement by the Democrats to run for senator from Minn. got me thinking about entertainers that may be interesting politicians. So here are 10 that I thought about, in no particular order. None of them will likely or should win offices. People who are actually serious about running such as Fred Thompson or Warren Beatty are not considered here. Arnold and Ventura were already mentioned as athletes in 2006 blog and are not eligible here.

1. Oprah. Anyone can come up with this one. The most powerful woman in America already, she easily wins the female and black vote anytime she wants.

2. Jackie Chan. Ability to get out of trouble and avoiding attacks is a big asset in Hong Kong politics.

3. Carlos Mencias. This totally political incorrect Hispanic believes in equal opportunit-- He trashes all ethnic groups alike. He is a little too vulgar for me but he is hilarious. His Bud light commercial is great.

4. Bono. A serious man when not performing, Bono does a lot of humanitarian work. Bush met him about his work but was confused because he wanted to see Cher.

5. Stephen Colbert. A liberal pretending to be a conservative. I still don't know why Bush invited him to speak at a dinner. Didn't he realized that Colbert was a fake Republican?

6. Charles Barkley. Always wanted to be governor of Alabama. Can't afford to take a pay cut from TNT though. Has compelling story if he keeps gambling: from rags to riches back to rags.

7. Tina Fey. A very funny woman who looks dorky enough to be an intellectual while wearing those glasses.

8. Darrell Hammond. Does a great Bill Clinton. But he also does Al Gore. Can package himself as a recycled Gore and get the environmental vote.

9. Conan O'Brien. Being tall and an alumnus of Harvard help. Maybe a target of the Mafia for replacing an Italian-Jay Leno.

10. Martin Sheen. Already played a president on tv. More intellectual than people realiz, he is studying at either Oxford or Cambridge now. Has to try to keep his son Charlie out of trouble. Has to explain why he changed his name. He is short. Ok, too many negatives, back to acting!

Who should Obama pick as vp? Pros and cons of Clinton as vp has been dissected over tv and newspaper ad nauseum already. I am against it but if other people have the opposite opinion I can certainly understand it. Frankly I don't know who would be of any help to Obama in the election. I think it will be up to him to win the voters over in the swing states. At best a vp candidate from one of the swing states may help him at that particular state. He will win or lose the election on his own merit.

But having said that, who would I like to be vp? Joe Biden was my favorite to be president in the beginning so obviously I would like him to be vp. But since he got only about 0.5% of the votes while he was running he does not seem likely to be picked.

Anthony Zinni is a retired 4 star marine general who has diplomatic experience especially in the Middle East where he served as envoy to Israel and Palestine. He has written books and taught in colleges such as Duke (where he is now), VMI and Berkeley. He was a Republican at one time and voted for Bush in 2000. He called that one of the biggest mistakes in his life. He was a strong critic of going to war in Iraq from the beginning. This is from a man who had warned about terrorism especially the harboring of bin Laden by the Talibans before 2000. He understood the war would not make us safer. He warned about trusting Chalabi and other Iraqi expatriots who were leading us into the "Bay of Goats", a reference to the Bay of Pigs in the 60's. As a result of the Bush administration going to war in Iraq instead of finishing the job in Afghanistan, he left the party and has been an advisor to Obama in foreign affairs. I have seen him on tv and he is an excellent speaker who sounds very intelligent. His drawback is that he has never run for public office so there is no way to judge his ability on the campaign trail. He was born in Pennsylvania, a swing state, for what that is worth.

Jim Webb is a first term senator from Virgina so he has at least won political office before. Virginia is also a state that Obama would like to take from the Republicans and can possibly do it as he did great in the primary there. Webb is also a retired marine general who was a hero in Vietnam. He speaks fluent Vietnamese and is married to a Vietnamese woman who went to U. of Michigan law school. Like Zinni he has a son in the military. Webb's son returned from Iraq last year. Despite the loyalty he has for the military, Webb is totally against the war. He has teamed up with Obama to try to pass legislation to improve benefits for veterans.

Webb and Zinni are American military heroes who may help Obama with the people who question his "strength". Biden would help Obama with people who question his experience. Biden has never gotten much national support despite his experience. So who knows if any of these guys would do anything for Obama. I am just throwing out these 3 names because I believe these people are men of integrity and intelligence. They would never be elected president on their own but I rather that one of them be one heart beat to the presidency than the multitudes of politicians.