The only place Democrats want to drill
Scroll down for updates…Senate GOP holds the line on energy…
Not in ANWR.
Not offshore.
Where?
Yep: Your wallet.
Gotta get me one of those bumper stickers.
Meantime, another failure from the Nancy Pelosi and the 14 percenters:
The House of Representatives on Thursday failed to pass legislation intended to cool off gasoline prices by requiring the government to sell 70 million barrels of light sweet crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the national stockpile.
Democrats had pushed the legislation, hoping to lower surging oil prices by putting more of the reserve’s light sweet crude, sought by refiners, on the market. Sweet crude is desirable because it has less sulphur and is more easily refined into gasoline, diesel fuel and other petroleum products.
The White House had threatened to veto the measure, arguing that Congress should work toward increasing domestic supply rather than tap into a strategic reserve.
Although the House voted 268 to 157 in favor of the legislation, the measure fell short of obtaining the two-thirds “yes” vote that is required when the chamber suspends its rules to act quickly on a bill.
Michael Franc at Heritage says public pressure is working:
For the first time in a while, House Republicans are on the offense on an issue of national importance: removing obstacles to the production of more American energy.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey abruptly shut down his committee indefinitely rather than allow Republicans to offer an amendment to open more areas to drilling for new sources of oil and natural gas. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid concur. According to the New York Times, she and Reid “appear intent on holding the line against calls to approve drilling in areas now off limits.”
Obey fears that the amendment, by drilling advocate Rep. John Peterson (R., Penn.), would win. As many as eight of the committee’s Democrats have supported similar amendments in the past, while only a couple of the committee’s Republicans (who represent well-heeled suburban districts) have stood with the environmental lobby.
Democratic defections, moreover, likely would spread beyond the Appropriations Committee. A careful analysis of previous floor votes on a wide array of energy production issues indicates that as many as 40 House Democrats would join the overwhelming majority of House Republicans in support of an agenda to increase American energy production dramatically…
…Quietly, in recent weeks House Republican leaders have adopted precisely this strategy. Rank-and-file Republicans have been filing one discharge petition per week (five thus far), demanding floor action on a far-reaching energy agenda. The agenda includes bills to construct new oil refineries; drill for oil and natural gas offshore as well as on a tiny portion of the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge; repeal regulations that needlessly increase the price of gasoline; produce energy from alternative sources such as oil shale, tar sands and coal-to-liquid; and explore the next generation of oil and natural gas fields in deep-sea regions far off our coasts.
With little media coverage, and lacking the visible support of business groups, conservative organizations or talk radio, these petitions have nevertheless garnered as many as 153 signatures, with one Democrat — Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D., Hawaii) — even risking the wrath of his leadership by signing on.
An informal head count suggests there are an additional 75 to 100 House members, including those 40 Democrats, who, based on their previous support for proposals to increase American energy production, could be open to signing these petitions, thereby pushing the number of signatures over the required 218.
Should the conservative media, the conservative movement, and, yes, the president (his soapbox still carries weight) catch on to this strategy, pressure would increase on pro-energy lawmakers to sign on. Voters would learn that the Speaker’s word isn’t final. And we just might get a real debate on the merits of producing more American energy.
***
Ed Morrissey checks out the latest WSJ poll on energy and points to WaPo taking on do-nothing Pelosi over her drilling intransigence.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Wizard, fkap
- Moonage Political Webdream » » HOW Democrat obstructionism affects you directly
- No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble, part 1 - 7/25/2008
- Bumper Snicker of the Day | BitsBlog
- Your Wallet - the only Place Democrats want to Drill | Conservative247
- The only place Democrats want to drill… « GOP ftw
- silent E speaks - Conservatively Speaking from Western Waukesha County » Obey And Pelosi Sittin’ In A Tree….
- Red_State_Blue
- Democrats Want to Drill…! « Truth and Reason
- Synthstuff - music, photography and more...
- Maggie's Farm
- The only place Democrats want to drill « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian
- What Do You Do When You Don’t Have Ideas To Blog About?
- Swamp Hermit’s *QUICK* Bits « The Swamp Hermit’s Report
- The Truth Behind Environmental Issues
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Enviro-nitwits
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year plan
Pundit & Pundette
» Hiding the decline: Deniers made them do itPower Line
» More From the East Anglia ArchivesFounding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtDoug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist Remarks
craig, I don’t think they were ever turned on. Me thinks someone slipped.
(NOT looking at see-dubya)
Of course I could be wrong
Okay, for some reason i thought see-dubya submited the kwame article. mea culpa. It was michelle.
Abstractmind:
Thanks for the info. Now, how to counter the Dems preaching about the whole “use it or lose it” philosphy. The Dems have been bleating about how oil companies aren’t using the leased federal lands and therefore that’s their explanation for why there can’t be any drilling in ANWR, the OCS, or off-shore.
Is there a good article that examines the current oil resources that may or may not be able to be exploited in the leased federal lands? The Dems are using this to prevent further drilling elsewhere. It needs to be fully examined, explained, so that we can finally peel back this tactic as the stalling mechanism it really is by the Dems.
Anybody who has any information about this, please feel free to link. Thanks!
Here’s what I would say to any owner of one of the “billion” (nice claim btw) US vehicles:
The increase in the price of your gas is caused by a multitude of factors, primarily the devaulation of the dollar. Oil futures speculation and rising demand are also causes. Opening up off-shore drilling would not help domestic supply for at least 10-12 years and the EIA goes further saying that opening the OCS “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030″. A more immediate solution to help gases prices is to call you local congressman and encourage them to support any bill that regulates the oil futures market, and any measure that would end our deficit spending. It is our deficit spending and poor ecomony which is killing the value of the dollar and thus causing more of our dollars to buy a barrel of oil.
Maybe it is just fear. If Kwame is not afraid to assault a police officer who know what he is capable of.
Apparently thinks the entire US and continental shelf is his backyard.
The people who say that the Democrats WANT gas prices to be high have it exactly right. The proposal to open up the strategic reserve is sort of cute politically because it probably would have some short term effect through election day that they can take credit for, assuming that a big Democrat victory in November will then let them go back to implementing their radical environmental agenda for at least 2 more years.
Maybe 1 billion includes riding mowers?
Oil futures speculation is a red herring that shows a lack of understanding of how the futures market works (or, in the case of a lot of Democrats, a deliberate attempt to scapegoat and mislead). In the futures market, for every one who speculates that prices are going up, there has to be someone speculating that prices are going down. It’s a futures CONTRACT, which requires two people on the opposite end of the risk. All the futures market does is use market forces to predict what the price of oil will be in the future using all the information available in the present. They cannot control the external forces that actually set prices and don’t “make” prices go up or down. If you think the speculators who are betting prices are going up are wrong, you are more than welcome to bet against them.
The real reason for high oil prices is primarily supply and demand (the booming demand in China and India combined with stagnant supply caused by prohibitions on drilling and refining thanks to the enviros), and to a much lesser extent the decline in the dollar.
All the cackling about Speculation is nonsense but very much in the Liberal/Progressive Control the Markets ideology-fascism.
Speculators can do nothing but guess/bet about the future supply and demand of a commodity. We are fairly certain what the demand will be at any given price. Supply was the fly in the ointment in this calculation. With in hours of Pelosi/Reid statements they would NOT allow domestic drilling AND planned to start a fight with the oil producers by suing them in American courts the markets panicked and you would too.
Despite some really silly statements Futures do not set the market, they react to it. But the Democrats will lie about anything. As long as we import most of our oil, do not drill here, do not build refineries we have ourselves at a disadvantage. So build a windmill, hang your clothes on a line and walk to work. Or Drill here, drill now, pay less, the choice is yours.
–
Allah be Praised
Allie OOP OOP 2
A couple of you requested this but I don’t know where to put it, so here it is.
TOS: your comments betray a basic lack of economics. If hundreds of billions of dollars now spent on importing oil stay HERE, then the dollar will become stronger because there won’t be so many of them sloshing around on the world market.
Secondly, isn’t “energy independence” a mantra of the left ? Doesn’t drilling HERE help move us to that goal?
Have you not been told that alternative energy sources (other than nuclear) cannot make a dent in our overall needs?
That converting corn to ethanol is causing food prices to climb dramatically in Mexico and elsewhere?
That solar is TEN TIMES as expensive as coal? That wind power is unreliable, cannot be stored, and is esthetically repellent?
Yet you think regulating speculators will do….what? You think the US can regulate speculators in Europe and Japan?
You’re not just intellectually shallow.
You’re a dry hole.
Democratic Leadership – the new oxymoron. While the dems make us pay at the pump, they have made a sweet deal for the convention so they can have cheaper, nontaxed fuel. We little people just don’t know our place.
rpg,
What an assanine comment. Rising gas prices are about the only leg Republicans have to stand on in the November elections. Take gas prices out of the equation, do you think McCain has a better or worse change of getting elected. And once the Dems take over in 2009, they still won’t want high gas price…see high gas prices hurt the economy and come election time the economy is always a central issue.
Here’s a nickel
Buy a Clue
Let’s pile it on
More
Global Demand?
Supply & Demand vs. Prices
Anybody want to bet that congress can get to a single-digit approval rating before November?/sarc.off..
Unless the government is going to buy us all hybrids we are going to keep using oil. Most people are adapting to the higher cost. People who are trying to sell their SUV’s are moaning about the hit they’re taking in the marketplace
You are mostly on track with the speculation, but if those speculators had to take physical possession of the oil it probably would not have gone up quite as fast as it did. I could be wrong and I guess we will never know.
The Libs are idiots. Let’s not drill now because it will take ten years before anything happens.
Yet, they want to do everything they can to stop this gorebal warming bull now so decades later things will change.
Suck it up. That’s what you said to homeowners who counted on interest rates staying low. Why not say it to truckers who counted on gas prices staying low? Please post some reasons.
How Bush contributed to the high cost of gas:
* Budget deficit and trade deficit brings down the value of the dollar.
* Creating chaos in the middle east raises the price of oil.
* not reducing our need for oil by:
** Building more public transportation
** Supporting milage standards for cars
** Investing in alternative energy sources
** Investing in conservation
Bottom line: the price of gas is at least in large part a consequence of decisions by conservatives over the past decade. Now it’s time to live with the consequences of those decisions. Suck it up.
I can see your book sales have sky rocketed lgm. It’s the old It’s Booooshes fault scenerio, you never get tired of the old swoop and poop do you.
Increased regulation of the commodities markets won’t do a damn thing, except skew the market. Stop blaming commodities buyers. They’re the ones taking the risks. If you think no one lost money during the recent drops in oil prices, then you simply don’t understand how the market works. If you think no one loses money when the prices rise, then same as before. There are winners and losers. No need to regulate.
I’m inclined to think that all of us will be sucking it up after January 2009.
Oh yeah, I forgot that the Middle East was a bastion of calm and peace prior to Bush.. Thanks for reminding me, oh great LGM.
You really are a broken record.
Bush did not create a budget deficit all by his lonesome. It takes an especially inept Congress, too. I agree that the budget deficit causes the dollar to drop in value (after all, it is based on our “credit” and nothing says credit risk like issuing a few trillion in t-bills.) Perhaps we should cut spending…maybe?
The trade deficit would actually shrink as the dollar devalues. Plus, protectionist policies are good for no one (even Democrats). Free trade is the path to peace and prosperity.
Bush was not required to create chaos in the Middle East. It was there. If anything he’s probably set in motion a long-term solution to the idiocy that the British helped create in the 20th century: democracy. The question is, how do we get these kingdoms and sheikdoms to move in that direction? It’s relatively easy to do so with a rogue dictator, but a friendly tyrant?
If mid east chaos was a cause of high oil prices, why would they have risen so precipitously during a time of reduced violence?
It is NOT the President’s responsibility to:
*build more public transportation
*increase automobile mileage standards
*invest in alternative energy, or
*invest in conservation (whatever that means)
What makes you think that the market won’t take care of these things? If fuel prices rise, the demand for fuel efficient cars rise. If solar and wind and hydro and nuclear energy can be profitably captured, then a market will emerge.
Public transportation might take off if we DEREGULATED it. Why can’t people buy buses or vans and set up routes and charge fares? Why is this limited to a local government granted monopoly? Why does limited and expensive rail always get presented by social do-gooders?
The fact that one would suggest that the president is responsible for this stuff shows an unhealthy regard for the power of the office. I don’t want Obama or McCain to have the power to create these kinds of policies.
Maybe, if our governments could just leave us alone (and if corporations would quit begging for and receiving handouts) then the market could take its messy and innovative course. Ultimately, we’d all be better off.
Impressive. Apparently, Bush is capable of single-handedly holding dominion over Wall St. if not most of the planet. Now I understand why Obama said what he said!
Obama has assured me that, on Nov 5th, the rise of the oceans will begin to slow and our planet will begin to heal.
Of course, I meant “democracy” as the solution above. The British created the idiocy that is the current state of the Middle East. Sorry for the confusion.
No, no questions, nice photoshop. But does this mean you do not worship at the feet of the Chosen One, the Annointed, Hero of the Left, Consort of mamaObama, Two Positions, or more, on Every Issue FlimFlamSam, Friend of the Weatherunderground, Friend of the PLO?
Repent Blind_Mule repent. The MessiahFuhrer demands you repent. And it would be good for mamaObama’s children, not yours or mine just hers.
This is HIS moment, this is HIS time. For HE said so. When is he leaving the Reich so we don’t have to refer to him as the MessiahFuhrer?
—
Allah be Praised
Allie OOP OOP 2
I’d be happy to, but you’re going to want to sit down.
You provide an instance that is supposed to be equivalent, but you’re using the “this is how it looks” and not really how it is kind of debate.
The low mortgage issue is based upon ARM’s, or Adjustible Rate Mortgage. These normally have a lower interest rate, and as rates change, the amount of the payment does as well. You’re a math scholar, so this isnt really difficult. If you’ve kept up, or even bothered to read about those in the past, the problem with ARM’s are that when something goes wrong, or when rates go up, people feel the crunch as the payment goes up. Now, take into account that there were more high risk persons who took loans on property who used ARM’s to get their house in the first place. When those people, who should never have been given the credit to get a home in the first place, fold up and leave, the interest rate goes even higher, up to the allowed maximum per contract. People who have fixed rate mortgages have (usually) lower interest rates and are more stable. People who “counted on interest rates staying low” were the same ones who got into mortgages without thinking that one day, the company would come back and charge the largest percentage. For those who used ARM’s, i say shame on you for not only missing the fine print, but for also not planning for bad times and now crying foul for wanting to displace their personal responsibility.
Now that all of that is out of the way, lets deconstruct the rest of your rant, one brick at a time.
Bush doesn’t set the price of gas, first off. While i disagree with the President on some issues, he has nothing to do with the actual price of gas. You can b!tch and complain all day about “Bush is to blame”, but thats not really how things are.
These have been on the downslide for a while. Have you ever actually seen the deficit for pricing under clinton? While i can agree that bush isnt helping, this isnt anything new. Pinning the tail on Bush’s donkey while its a problem Democrats have specifically contributed to (how’s Pelosi on that trading thing with South American interests going BTW???) is disingenuous at best.
Chaos is the stock and trade of those countries, all on their own. But this is a 2 fold answer. Look at the stabilization of the region in the last 20 years. Hell, even take since we entered Iraq. Perfect place? Of course not. But if you want chaos, lets start by inspecting Iran’s interests. Do you think their nuclear ambition isnt something that causes chaos? How about their involvement in supplying weapons to Al Qaeda? How about terrorist sponsors in the region? Hamas anyone? How is any of that pushing for stability?
The second point i could make, which ties directly to your earlier post, is that if we were drilling and keeping our own oil, we wouldnt need to worry with it anyway, and would remove this issue off the table. But you’re opposed to drilling here. So which is it you want more? Foreign oil, or foreign chaos? Your choice. You’re a math teacher. What plays out with the best percentage?
A transparent and unapplicable argument. Please tell me how public transportation affects rural areas, where driving often takes 30 minutes to the closest grocery store or Wal-Mart? How does public transportation, which uses HUGE buses with abysmal gas milage, replace more efficient hybrid or ecomonically efficient vehicles? you dont think about things such as buses that already get horrible gas milage in a city setting with repeated stops which drop the milage further. How does that figure when you have to refuel more often. Figure in the time investment based on the fact that buses take forever and only run on schedules and can often take people miles from where they may need to be in order to get to their destination, and you lose efficiency there.
Car manufacturers and the market itself dictate those things. If people dont mind buying a huge SUV and filling it up, then thats fine. But what do most people think of first when they go car shopping?
Gas Mileage. It’s universally one of the first things people look at on a car. And in this day in time, you best believe thats a HUGE factor in car shopping. The marketplace dictates these things. If the government mandates it, thats fine, but…it wont because the market drives the need. And the market works.
You mean like ethanol? How about this site that states we’ve dropped 3 BILLION dollars into it so far.How much cash will be dropped into that useless cesspool in the future? The government DIRECTLY subsidizes farmers for the corn used to make it(but nevermind the cost of corn has increased 30% since we started throwing food away for this crap). How about the developments of other energy sources by both government funding AND private companies working on the issue? Even claiming this shows you dont care, arent informed, or are trying to draw out statements by people who aren’t informed. Laughable at best. There are multiple examples, even found here at michelle’s site, that have reviewed these things. Water based engines, plasma power, ethanol, the guy with the 110 mile/gallon engine in Texas…how many more examples do you need?
Just in pulling from some waste management sites, how about some information?
Here for renewable energy
Here for some other information.
That whole site, just to show one company, has done plenty, and continues to do so. A quote from their site:
Today, Waste Management landfills provide more than 19,000 acres of protected land for wetlands and wildlife habitat, which are carefully managed in partnership with conservationists, universities and environmental groups. Many of these projects provide refuge for threatened or endangered species. They also serve to broaden understanding of wildlife and environmental values through environmental education, volunteer participation and community outreach.
Again, the market, and the private sector, are doing what needs to be done. Our government has set aside millions of acres of land as protected, and helps manage millions more.
Here’s the EPA’s page with the numbers, if you bother to read it.
No. The bottom line is you’re whining about something you have no basis in fact about, something you obviously have done no research about, and blame on someone who doesnt have a direct hand in causing the problem. I’ve posted facts, stats, numbers, and information and the best you can come up with is “suck it up”.
And i never finished college. You’re supposed to be educated. And THAT was the best you could come up with? I sit at a desk and work all day and i’ve compliled this and typed this up on my BREAK TIME.
You’re going to have to do alot better, lgm, even though i have to admit slamming you like this is alot of fun, albeit repetative.
Try again.
I have scanned the posts to this point and find A couple of unclear disturbing points.
1) the dems like seeing economic pain.
2) see how stupid the dems are.
I would argue both the above statements are false.
To understand why they are false you must understand the socialist dems strategy then consider the tatics necessary to attain their strategic goal.
They have progressed far enough to show intent. They have become confident enough to become cocky to show their intentions even more. Also there is a reason for them to rush with a sort of desperation.
The next few months will be very telling. If Obama, to a lessor degree even McCain, is elected the next few years will be even more telling.
The next few years will be very dangerous to personal freedom, the fight will be exciting to watch,and the stakes freedom here and across the planet.
rpg1616 (#101),
Exactly. Commodities buyers (or “speculators”) are nothing more than the recipients of harm or reward based on what happens to the actual price of oil. If demand is high enough, they make money. If not, they lose. That is, of course, they are going long on prices. For those that short, the opposite is true.
The question is, if some of these buyers are controlling vast amounts of capital with very little of their own, what happens when they guess wrong? There will be another “crisis”. Another opportunity for a boondoggle bailout scheme. That’s the real danger.
Feel free to take the risks. Be prepared to accept the consequences.
LGM I was going to post a really long reply, but clearly I don’t need to except to simply something:
Mortgages = Personal responsibility.
Oil prices = Not a personal responsility.
I tried to keep it simple because as you stated college professors are mostly ignorant outside thier comfort zones. If I want to talk about the depts of mathmatic theory, You are on the top of my list (honestly, I will defer to you on that) but economics as related to geoplotical realities not so much.
good point some dems want us to plug 300,000,000 cars into our wall outlets.
LOL you got me I never considered the large numbers of small things like lawn mowers and garden tillers.
thanks for the info
The spelling part on my brain is already off for the day. come on 4pm!!!
If you were to debate mathematical theory with lgm, my money is on you.
Mathematics (the mechanics of numbers) is based on logic, lgm clearly has little logic in his thinking.
Not today, my mind is more on beer and the weekend than work and its sure as hell isn’t going to wrap itself arround complex math. Maybe on monday, but not today. TGIF
They are on now!
lgm, you said:
It is not the governments job to do this. If there is a viable alternative to oil, the private sector does quite well at exploiting it on their own. I know you probably have a hard time understanding this, as you probably have your mommy type your comments here, pour your juicy-juice and make your bed.
Wow! Really? Someone slip some “Red Bull” in their morning coffee? Talk about an historial undertaking! And to think all these years, I thought all they could say was “Duh” and “Well, okay”.
Did someone say beer?
abstractmind (#121) said:
Public transportation can’t serve everyone. But if it reduces driving by 20% nationwide, the price of gas goes down $1/gal.
sonofdy said (#124) (also in a more longwinded way, abstractmind):
Why? Interest rates of an ARM going up is your fault — you should have planned for that — but gas prices going up is not your fault?
The Dems continue to ignore the most important point of more domestic drilling. We currently send about 1.7 billion dollars/day out of the country for imported oil. Some of the nations who receive this money are using it to buy the USA. Most recently the Chrysler building bought by Dubai. We are using what is becominng monoply money to buy oil from people, some of whom hate us, and then that money is being used to buy our country. Do the Dems not see any problem with that?
Good point twiggman. But, don’t forget in this day and age congress doesn’t really give a damn about what’s legal and what’s not. Those egotistical piles of snake dung can now pick and choose which laws they want to enforce. They are the Champions…they are the Kings and Queens….and to hell with the peons (= constituents).
B I N G O !
Any dictated increases in the use of public transportation will only result in more reports of violent assault against the aged, the indigent and between the races.
It’s only theoretical that greater use of public transport would be bring about a precipitous decrease in the price of fuel; there’s no proof of an inverse relationship.
What’s more, the American public is too atuned to the concept of personal space and self determination to give up their autos and “share a ride.”.
I only have one thing to say
N – O – V – E – M – B – E – R
I take public transportation all the time–American Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Delta (if I have to). It’s clean and efficient.
On the other hand municipal public transportation is dirty, inefficient and wouldn’t survive without massive public subsidies.
DBNinKY said:
“Any dictated increases in the use of public transportation will only result in more …”
OK, mass transit only works where there is a mass, true that. It wouldn’t work in KY, for sure.
But here in NYC my air conditioned commute by subway was 35 minutes each way, the only “between the races” incident I have to report is that the nice lady from the Philippines I have been talking to on the train finally agreed to have dinner & drinks with me tomorrow night (we are going Italian, go figure) & the total cost of the ride was 4 bucks round trip… Try it, you might like it.
Brooklyn Red ignores a number of facts, namely:
* the holes those miles of NYC subways run through were dug, constructed and tracked years ago. New subways in urban areas would require tens of billions in capital expenditures in each city. They would create enormous disruption of existing traffic and business (see what happened with Boston’s “Big Dig”, which now has cost-overruns of about $15 billion).
As in Boston (another 100-year-old system) trains are often old, dirty and poorly maintained.
Ridership has been declining for years. So what does the transit authority do? Exactly what the NY Times did the other day: raise prices!
* Red apparently thinks the NYC subway system is a real business, making a profit or breaking even. Wrong.
So the total cost of the ride is a lot higher than “4 bucks round trip”. Red just lets other taxpayers, mostly non-riders, pay for it!
But other than that, urban mass transit is a great, cost-efficient idea!
I do not have many details but Mpls Mn put in lite rail and had millions in cost over runs also.
Maybe someone here knows some details.
For all our buddies on the Left with their environmental concerns:
Wasn’t there just a an oil spill related to an oil tanker?
Hmmm, let me see… If we drill our own using pipelines as opposed to tankers, isn’t that good for the environment?
and subsiderarys go up $1.50/gal.
If pubic trans is so great…why can’t it pay for itself? Hell, I don’t know! Go ask AMTRACK!
fulldroolcup said:
Brooklyn Red ignores a number of facts, namely:
Come on cup, I said it doesn’t work every where, just where there are masses. And of course it ain’t a for profit business… why do you think 60 cents per gallon taxes exist, plus 8 dollar bridge tolls… OK, my ride is paid for by those who insist on driving into the city despite the mass transit option. If you, so that you don’t have want to pay 35 bucks a day for parking so you don’t have to rub elbows with the likes of me, what can I say… thanks for the ride sir!
Oh, & there is this thing called a bus, but that too is probably beneath you…
I heard that someone tried test-drilling Pelosi’s head and found unnatural gas…
christ time for you all to think christ please think think think what is wrong with you all please start to think and think and think
if you cannot think we all die
get it together please please
On July 25th, 2008 at 12:00 pm, abstractmind said:
The phrase “poop and flee tactic” is so perfect for so many internet related/work related/relationship related dilemmas that I regret to inform you that I will be shamelessly co-opting it.
Thanks in advance abstractmind.
I am enjoying the environment I am living in today.
I am not worried about the Environment 100 years from now.
Ever since the gas price climbed past $4 a gallon, I have been driving on Southern California freeways at a cruising speed of 55 miles/hour.
This is my way of conserving (as the liberals preach).
So far, I have yet to pass one single slower vehicle on the freeways.
According to the statistical data, more than 50% of Southern Californians are loony leftists.
Conclusion: Energy conservation is for the conservatives. Liberals are free to drive @80+ speeds.
In their quest for fostering creativity, liberals have produced two generations of knuckleheads. If only, these idiots were forced to study Physics along with creativity, we could have more efficient internal combustion engine by now.
Do these knuckleheads know that electricty generated by Solar and Wind can not be stored for use at night? That means, we still need fossill energy at night.
A challenge for these knuckleheads:
If Russians are exploring for energy in the arctic, and if the OPEC drills / pumps more oil on their soil, how is that not damaging the environment?
OOOOOh I like that can I use it???
I DO worry about 100 years from today!!!
I declare yet again G O R E is full of smelly stuff!!! Prove me wrong!!!! do not give me heresay, gossip, or false graphs. DO give me a scientific example and logic.
O you cannot? wow surprise surprise.
A surfing accident that he thought was a waterboarding. It’s Bush’s fault.
As for pigs flying – swine flu…
I seem to recall the media stating that it’d take YEARS to replace that fallen bridge in Minnesota, or all those earthquake-wrecked freeways in L.A. from that last bad quake…
James Greenidge
Queens NY
BR, I agree that mass transit is a blessing in urban areas (Atlanta and Miami to be sure), but I disagree with LGM’s blanket assertion that its greater would reduce fuel consumption and prices because it won’t.
Like you said, mass transit only exists where there are masses of people, i.e., the metro areas of the NY, CA, FLA, GA, etc. The rest of the country is not dependent enough on such forms of transportation for an increase in its use to have anything other than a negligible impact on decreased fuel consumption.
Btw, I am glad you’ve had only positive experiences with mass transit, but the same cannot be said for everyone. I was thinking of the incident in Baltimore, the couple attacked by the rampaging youths, when I posted the comment.
Damn, you really are an idiot, aren’t you?
Please tell me where I can go to sign a contract that allows me to choose between:
1. Paying $3.00 per gallon of gas for the next 30 years OR
2. Paying $1.50 for the next 5 years and then letting market forces determine the price thereafter.
Maybe the Republicans could use this….energy for Americans….as an campaign issue, you know to regain control of congress and perhaps do the peoples business. But nah that would be provocative and non bi-partisan. They would probably “share” power with the democrats anyway, there by giving up the advantage of majority anyway…..oh well we can get along with out energy no?
If expanded drilling is such a high priority for the Republicans, can anyone offer an explanation as to why this wasn’t accomplished when they controlled both the White House and the Congress?
Because gas wasn’t so expensive then, and it made sense to let someone else do the work.
Victor Hugo said: Necessity is the mother of invention. For example, when the price of going to the movies gets too high, you start staying home and watching your own TV.
DRILL NOW, REFINERIES NOW, NUCLEOR NOW, ALTERNATIVE ENERGY NOW, GET RID OF ILLEGALS NOW (just thought I would throw that last one in as a rider to my bill)
I would like to see a site (maybe one exists) listing the congressman and senators Yea or Nay on drilling. Then we could start pressure from the grass roots. I think that could gather their attention (and fear).
(o:
—
Allah be Praised
Allie OOP OOP 2
What rob said and we enjoy tweaking Liberals. Just as soon as we were done stealing blankets and water bottles from the homeless and putting widows and orphans into the street we were going to fix the oil problem.
—
Allah be Praised
Allie OOP OOP 2
On July 26th, 2008 at 10:46 am, Rob said:
Because gas wasn’t so expensive then, and it made sense to let someone else do the work.
Rob, this sounds more like an excuse than a reason. So you are basically saying that policy should be driven by reaction versus vision. I would rather have politicians with vision lead the country.
Could it be that it was not politically expedient to due it when the Republicans had total control? And now after the Republicans have dropped the ball, it’s suddenly the Democrats fault.
Oh yeah, I forgot abou that one! Quit stealing my tax dollars for those losers!
And drill for some damn OIL!
On July 26th, 2008 at 11:11 am, Rob said:
Oh yeah, I forgot about that one! Quit stealing my tax dollars for those losers!
Unfortunately we don’t get to choose where our tax dollars are allocated. So quit your whining and move somewhere where you can take public transportation if you can’t afford the price of gas.
AND the ObamaMessiah came down from
the mountainParis and waved his hand over the cup of water and it changed into oil and the cup runneth over.I agree les it is and excuse and there are no exuses, So tell me, why did’nt the Dimocrats fix the problem in 1973 when Congress was controlled by Dimocraps and in 1979 when the Dimocraps controlled the Presidency and the Congress? If you don’t convienently remember or are to young to remember those are the two years this country experieced an oil crisis. Tell me the reasons why it was allowed to happen again?
WHAAAAT??? We don’t get to choose where our tax dollars are allocated???? What commune did you escape from?
This country was founded on the principle that power comes from god, who blesses the PEOPLE who then LEND that power for a time to elected REPRESENTITIVES that work for the PEOPLE’S interests. You MUST be an Obamamaniac.
And anyway, I don’t want to ride on buses. I want more, inexpensive gasoline to power my air-conditioned SUV.
Thanks, LOL
I guess they will have to take me out into the square and shoot me, to make an example of me then. I WILL NOT REPENT TO THE OBAMESSIAH!
I’M not tired of those things… I am against the first three could care less about the fourth and support the rest.
Heaven forbid, the will of the people should prevail.
http://www.congressionalreports.gov then look under voting records
Apologies, in advance, after several “Adult Beverages” my sister and her “Significant Other” have announced they are “Going Steady”…
Have NO DOUBT where John wants to drill!!!
He does, also, support the drill here, drill now philosophy. So he’s not all bad!
Learn to read the whole post before deriding others, asshole!
I was trying to expose liberal hypocracy
Democrats do a great many things that p*** me off, but there are few that get my blood boiling as much as trying to dip into the reserves for political expediency! They are not the politically strategic petroleum reserves, they are there in case war, national emergency or an act of God cuts off our supply! Should we be cut off from foreign sources entirely, there is only enough to last the nation several months.
And where is the media on this? Well, they’re in Europe with their heads so far up Obama’s *bleeep* they can count his teeth. But where they should be is asking that vile, loathsome lying witch that runs the most unpopular congress in history what exactly she would do if suddenly, after she used up great quantities of our emergency reserves for her political gain, something horrible happened, and we needed that oil?
I really do detest that woman.
In a way I saw the point of selling off the entire strategic petrolium reserve, but that time has now passed.
If we had sold when oil was at $145 a barrel, and then bought it back with oil at $125 a barrel, we would have made a $20 a barrel profit. At 700 million barrels that’s $14 billion dollars. (sorry if I’m the only one who thinks that’s a big amount of money)
However, that time has passed. Drill now!!
I ordered 3 bumper-stickers from the Tennessee Republican Party. Now if only the other “56″ ;~) State Republican Party organizations would get on board we could cover the country with those stickers!!!
or get it HERE
Dems have already tapped it out…it’s now a dry-hole.
All this was, was another prime example of the Liberals and Democrats doing what it is they do best: Operating from a knee-jerk reaction rather than functioning with a long term fix.
The problem is not supply. All this little stunt did was demonstrate two things:
1. That Reid, Pelosi and the other Liberals and Dems truly do not understand what the problem is and why prices on the OPEN MARKET are so high and,
2. That this was a sad, pathetic attempt to garner votes in November by doing something completely meaningless, using the Reseve Oil for something that it is not meant to be or designed to be used for. Their hopes was to possibly have and incredibly short term fix, hoping that there were just enough gullible idiots who don’t know what the problem is to sway the votes.
Unfortunately any lowering that MIGHT have occurred with the release of said reserves, would have long evaporated by November, and actually might have had the OPPOSITE effect.
We do not need short term band-aids placed on a still festering and bleeding problem. We need a long-term fix, such as opening up the coast, ANWR, and other oil rich areas in THIS country for exploration and drilling as well as making it fair and easier to build new refineries and actually allowing said refineries to be built.
The Liberals and Lefties ae always carping about how we must become self-reliant on oil and to get rid of all the foreign oil being imported, yet they do nothing else but make it impossible for that to happen, which only guarantees our dependance on oil from such places as Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and other countries who want nothing more than to see our country destroyed.
Well, obviously, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia do not want to see our country destroyed — because then they couldn’t sell us their oil!
PLUS without our demand the price of oil would go down.
But yes, the Dems offer contradictory, and ultimately STUPID, reasons for not encouraging domestic drilling.
fulldroolcup posted #182
I think this is the part of it you have wrong. I think Chavez is enough of a nutcase to want the United States destroyed because then we won’t be opposing his ambitions. As for Saudi Arabia, well, we stand in the way of the worldwide Caliphate. Besides, they can always sell to communist China.
Hey, Meximerica will buy their oil… and when they come here to visit, their language will be spoken! Won’t Obama be proud!