A Step in the Right Direction

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Obama is such a piece of shit. Nothing but attack attack attack from him.

You’re being facetious… right? …right?

Have you been paying attention? His campaign is built on empty words about change and attacks on his opponents.

He should have taken the opportunity to clarify his position that he supports high energy prices but he would rather not for obvious reasons.

Oh, the irony! You’re voting for McCain who stands for…uh who knows!? Against drilling, for drilling, what will tomorrow bring?[/quote]

Stop trying to use the flip flopper spin the Republicans used on Kerry in 2004. Come up with your own original ideas cause it isn�??t sticking.

And yes Bush is an incompetent dolt who has done nothing but voting in the left wing incompetent dolt to replace the right wing one is not going to make the world a better place.

42

[quote]100meters wrote:

McCain:
“[W]ith those resources, which would take years to develop, you would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels,” McCain said when asked about offshore drilling. “We are going to have to go to alternative energy, and the exploitation of existing reserves of oil, natural gas, even coal, and we can develop clean coal technology, are all great things. But we also have to devote our efforts, in my view, to alternative energy sources, which is the ultimate answer to our long-term energy needs, and we need it sooner rather than later.”

[/quote]
Short-term, long-term, multi-pronged approach. Yes, I see now how this is so much worse than Bush�??s �??Just drill more holes and buy a bigger SUV. Yeee doggie!�?? and Obama�??s �??If we all just hold hands in the grass and meditate on how wonderful I am the whole problem will disappear. Change!�??

43

[quote]GreenMountains wrote:
wirewound wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
wirewound wrote:
You think you can drill your way out?

Increased domestic drilling is a major part of the solution, yes.

Read your history. Energy empires always die because they cling to old tech.

It happened to the Netherlands when they tried to cling to water/air energy. It happened to Britain when it tried to hang on to coal.

Now it’s happening to us as we try to hang on to oil. Entrenched energy interests will keep us tied to oil while the next energy empire rises in the East.

Like China, and their ever increasing use of…oil? Or China’s increased drilling in the south China Sea for…oil?

There’s plenty of oil to last the world until we can develop the next reliable energy source. We just need to be willing to drill it.

Probably China eventually. Maybe India.

Like I said, read your history. We are wedded to a dying energy source.

I have an iPod that puts all of my music in a tiny box with room to spare, but we’re still getting around on dead dinosaur juice? WTF?

Your iPod is made from petroleum based products. Shipped to you using transport burning petroleum products. Stored in warehouses and retail stores heated, cooled, and built from items using petroleum based products.[/quote]

Totally missed the point. The point wasn’t that my iPod was petroleum free. My point is, we’ve made so much more progress with electronics than we have with alternative energy sources.

44

[quote]GreenMountains wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Obama is such a piece of shit. Nothing but attack attack attack from him.

You’re being facetious… right? …right?

Have you been paying attention? His campaign is built on empty words about change and attacks on his opponents.

He should have taken the opportunity to clarify his position that he supports high energy prices but he would rather not for obvious reasons.

Oh, the irony! You’re voting for McCain who stands for…uh who knows!? Against drilling, for drilling, what will tomorrow bring?

Stop trying to use the flip flopper spin the Republicans used on Kerry in 2004. Come up with your own original ideas cause it isn�??t sticking.

[/quote]

It fits! I respected the McCain of 2000. I don’t respect the McCain of 2008. He used to bitch-slap the religious right, now he panders. I don’t trust him.

45

[quote]wirewound wrote:
GreenMountains wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Obama is such a piece of shit. Nothing but attack attack attack from him.

You’re being facetious… right? …right?

Have you been paying attention? His campaign is built on empty words about change and attacks on his opponents.

He should have taken the opportunity to clarify his position that he supports high energy prices but he would rather not for obvious reasons.

Oh, the irony! You’re voting for McCain who stands for…uh who knows!? Against drilling, for drilling, what will tomorrow bring?

Stop trying to use the flip flopper spin the Republicans used on Kerry in 2004. Come up with your own original ideas cause it isn�??t sticking.

It fits! I respected the McCain of 2000. I don’t respect the McCain of 2008. He used to bitch-slap the religious right, now he panders. I don’t trust him.

[/quote]

Yeah, but the alternative is far worse. And, if McCain gets in office I don’t think he’ll give the religious right another thought. And they know it. Which is part of his problem.

46

[quote]100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Also was McCain a POS in May when his position on coastal drilling was essentially the same as Obama’s, because oil wasn’t that cheap in May.

Also when McCain says:
“be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” of coastal drilling, do you laugh out loud at the silliness, or nod your head in agreement?

You think not drilling will help short term? What the fuck are you thinking at all? Of course drilling out own oil is going to help. Fool.

It obviously won’t help short term or long term most likely, you do get how this oil thing works right? Explore (not enough ships to do this, 5 year waiting list, Build Rig, Add infrastructure etc. All to decrease gas by pennies/maybe.

As it stands they have lots of coast to drill and don’t. Why would you at these prices? The goal is to control as much field as possible for future profits.

But no, clearly not a short term solution.[/quote]

I don’t understand this. I am not philosophically opposed to drilling offshore and elsewhere here in the US.

However, every expert I hear expounding on the topic says that even if we got a green light to start exploring/drilling today, the resulting oil won’t hit the market for 10-20 years. I don’t think this is a reason not to do it - but still, AFAIK it’s not going to help gasoline prices for a long time. We shouldn’t kid ourselves.

On the other hand, I suppose the future supply would have some impact on lowering current prices…

47

[quote]tedro wrote:
Quit blaming the US oil companies, they really are on our side.[/quote]

How can you make a statement like that when their profits the past 2 are the highest of any corporation IN HISTORY?

Okay, assuming we all have no problem with profits, then the blame goes on the DEMAND. Everyone I know is bitching about fuel prices, but they still drive their big vehicles… even to a store around the block! American’s are lazy complainers, but nobody wants to initiate a change. That’s the real problem here. When gas prices reach a critical point (whatever that may be… though I thought $4 a gal would have been it) then hopefully we’ll see a change in usage. But I doubt it. And oil companies are banking on it.

48

[quote]100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Also was McCain a POS in May when his position on coastal drilling was essentially the same as Obama’s, because oil wasn’t that cheap in May.

Also when McCain says:
“be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” of coastal drilling, do you laugh out loud at the silliness, or nod your head in agreement?

You think not drilling will help short term? What the fuck are you thinking at all? Of course drilling out own oil is going to help. Fool.

It obviously won’t help short term or long term most likely, you do get how this oil thing works right? Explore (not enough ships to do this, 5 year waiting list, Build Rig, Add infrastructure etc. All to decrease gas by pennies/maybe.

As it stands they have lots of coast to drill and don’t. Why would you at these prices? The goal is to control as much field as possible for future profits.

But no, clearly not a short term solution.[/quote]

My head hurts when I read this crap. There is no magical short term solution. The Dems have been blocking drilling for decades and we are now reaping what they have sown.

More drilling = more oil = better pricing for the consumer. It is amazing that you can try to spin it otherwise.

49

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
wirewound wrote:
GreenMountains wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Obama is such a piece of shit. Nothing but attack attack attack from him.

You’re being facetious… right? …right?

Have you been paying attention? His campaign is built on empty words about change and attacks on his opponents.

He should have taken the opportunity to clarify his position that he supports high energy prices but he would rather not for obvious reasons.

Oh, the irony! You’re voting for McCain who stands for…uh who knows!? Against drilling, for drilling, what will tomorrow bring?

Stop trying to use the flip flopper spin the Republicans used on Kerry in 2004. Come up with your own original ideas cause it isn�??t sticking.

It fits! I respected the McCain of 2000. I don’t respect the McCain of 2008. He used to bitch-slap the religious right, now he panders. I don’t trust him.

Yeah, but the alternative is far worse. And, if McCain gets in office I don’t think he’ll give the religious right another thought. And they know it. Which is part of his problem.
[/quote]

The only problems I have with Obama are his immigration stance (which McCain shares anyway), and his gun control stance.

His energy proposals seem as useless as McCain’s, but no worse (I suspect the president can’t really do much about this anyway). I like Obama’s tax proposals and his healthcare proposals (although I’d prefer a single-payer system). I also like Charles Murray’s (libertarian) views on healthcare - which go in a radically different but equally common-sense direction.

50

[quote]100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
More bullshit hackery from you. Obama offers nothing to relieve the crushing weight of the energy crisis that is killing the economy right now. Just a bunch of crap involving cap and trade, investment in bio fuels, and a shit ton of more government regulation w/r/t feul economy standards, building codes, bla, bla, bla…

Jesus this guy is fucking scary in what he believes. Leftist hippie environmentalism will NOT help the American economy right now. Drilling for more oil and increasing the number of refineries will. Sadly, I think you know this and just won’t admit it.

Oh, at least you admit your lie, good for you.[/quote]

I love it when your arguments are so weak that you have to somehow try and distort my posts into being a “lie”. Quite sad really.

[quote]Also McCain from May 08 for the same things as Obama. Who you voting for again?

McCain:
“[W]ith those resources, which would take years to develop, you would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels,” McCain said when asked about offshore drilling. “We are going to have to go to alternative energy, and the exploitation of existing reserves of oil, natural gas, even coal, and we can develop clean coal technology, are all great things. But we also have to devote our efforts, in my view, to alternative energy sources, which is the ultimate answer to our long-term energy needs, and we need it sooner rather than later.”[/quote]

Who knows. I’ve said before, this election is a leftists wet dream; no matter who wins, we’re getting a lib.

Horseshit. I say challenge the oil industry to have a significant increase in the amount of domestic oil supply and also have more refineries up and running in four years. You’d be suprised what private industry can accomplish when the feds get out of their way.

I’ve never claimed that McCain was my dream candidate. Far from it actually. Unfortunately however, we all are forced to choose the best candidate. Hell, maybe I’ll just vote my heart and write in Ted Nugent :wink:

[quote]So yeah your faking as bad as Zap now.
[/quote]

Now this is just as silly as you “lying” bit. Come now Lumpy, do you ever tire of being a partisan cheerleader?

51

Tom Ashbrook’s On Point is about (10 AM EST) to have an hour long show on this issue. It looks like a good one.

The line up includes:

· Kevin Hall, national economics correspondent, covering the oil industry for McClatchy newspapers

· Jim Presswood, energy advocate for the National Resources Defense Council

· Kevin Lindemer, senior analyst and head of the Global Energy Group at Global Insights, an economic forecasting firm

· Congressman Joe Barton, (R-Texas ), ranking member of the House Committee on Energy & Commerce

· Senator Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

I vote that Zap should call in :slight_smile:

52

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:

I vote that Zap should call in :slight_smile:

[/quote]

My voice is dead sexy.

53

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Also was McCain a POS in May when his position on coastal drilling was essentially the same as Obama’s, because oil wasn’t that cheap in May.

Also when McCain says:
“be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” of coastal drilling, do you laugh out loud at the silliness, or nod your head in agreement?

You think not drilling will help short term? What the fuck are you thinking at all? Of course drilling out own oil is going to help. Fool.

It obviously won’t help short term or long term most likely, you do get how this oil thing works right? Explore (not enough ships to do this, 5 year waiting list, Build Rig, Add infrastructure etc. All to decrease gas by pennies/maybe.

As it stands they have lots of coast to drill and don’t. Why would you at these prices? The goal is to control as much field as possible for future profits.

But no, clearly not a short term solution.

I don’t understand this. I am not philosophically opposed to drilling offshore and elsewhere here in the US.

However, every expert I hear expounding on the topic says that even if we got a green light to start exploring/drilling today, the resulting oil won’t hit the market for 10-20 years. I don’t think this is a reason not to do it - but still, AFAIK it’s not going to help gasoline prices for a long time. We shouldn’t kid ourselves.

On the other hand, I suppose the future supply would have some impact on lowering current prices…
[/quote]

75 cents (reduction) a barrel of oil 25 years from now from ANWR. Coastal drilling production output estimated to be half of theoretical ANWR. So add a few more cents. So basically jack squat.

Some idiots are too stupid to get the tendency to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the costs by this administration.

But basically May 2008 John McCain was right, drilling does jack squat. (does help the ol’ 401K though)

Hilariously, fakes like Zap just hosing Obama (actually calling him a P.O.S. )for having the same sensible postition based on govt. reports that the President (or zap, or flamer, or glenn beck) can’t be bothered to read.

54

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
More bullshit hackery from you. Obama offers nothing to relieve the crushing weight of the energy crisis that is killing the economy right now. Just a bunch of crap involving cap and trade, investment in bio fuels, and a shit ton of more government regulation w/r/t feul economy standards, building codes, bla, bla, bla…

Jesus this guy is fucking scary in what he believes. Leftist hippie environmentalism will NOT help the American economy right now. Drilling for more oil and increasing the number of refineries will. Sadly, I think you know this and just won’t admit it.

Oh, at least you admit your lie, good for you.

I love it when your arguments are so weak that you have to somehow try and distort my posts into being a “lie”. Quite sad really.

Also McCain from May 08 for the same things as Obama. Who you voting for again?

McCain:
“[W]ith those resources, which would take years to develop, you would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels,” McCain said when asked about offshore drilling. “We are going to have to go to alternative energy, and the exploitation of existing reserves of oil, natural gas, even coal, and we can develop clean coal technology, are all great things. But we also have to devote our efforts, in my view, to alternative energy sources, which is the ultimate answer to our long-term energy needs, and we need it sooner rather than later.”

Who knows. I’ve said before, this election is a leftists wet dream; no matter who wins, we’re getting a lib.

The whole point is this does nothing for us now through the next 10 years at least with little to no impact on prices. McCain knew it for a day at least. Then he forgot it.

Horseshit. I say challenge the oil industry to have a significant increase in the amount of domestic oil supply and also have more refineries up and running in four years. You’d be suprised what private industry can accomplish when the feds get out of their way.

Note also McCain’s recent ad, he’s for cap and trade, and reduced carbon emissions, which happens how?

I’ve never claimed that McCain was my dream candidate. Far from it actually. Unfortunately however, we all are forced to choose the best candidate. Hell, maybe I’ll just vote my heart and write in Ted Nugent :wink:

So yeah your faking as bad as Zap now.

Now this is just as silly as you “lying” bit. Come now Lumpy, do you ever tire of being a partisan cheerleader?

[/quote]

You lied. You said no plan. Then later typed the plan.

And no govt not the problem, logistics,exploring and infrastructure the actual problem, hence the decade or two to see the 75 cent reduction in a barrel of oil which equals a penny or 2 at the pump. 20 years from now. So please stop hyping this horseshit already.

55

[quote]100meters wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Also was McCain a POS in May when his position on coastal drilling was essentially the same as Obama’s, because oil wasn’t that cheap in May.

Also when McCain says:
“be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” of coastal drilling, do you laugh out loud at the silliness, or nod your head in agreement?

You think not drilling will help short term? What the fuck are you thinking at all? Of course drilling out own oil is going to help. Fool.

It obviously won’t help short term or long term most likely, you do get how this oil thing works right? Explore (not enough ships to do this, 5 year waiting list, Build Rig, Add infrastructure etc. All to decrease gas by pennies/maybe.

As it stands they have lots of coast to drill and don’t. Why would you at these prices? The goal is to control as much field as possible for future profits.

But no, clearly not a short term solution.

I don’t understand this. I am not philosophically opposed to drilling offshore and elsewhere here in the US.

However, every expert I hear expounding on the topic says that even if we got a green light to start exploring/drilling today, the resulting oil won’t hit the market for 10-20 years. I don’t think this is a reason not to do it - but still, AFAIK it’s not going to help gasoline prices for a long time. We shouldn’t kid ourselves.

On the other hand, I suppose the future supply would have some impact on lowering current prices…

75 cents (reduction) a barrel of oil 25 years from now from ANWR. Coastal drilling production output estimated to be half of theoretical ANWR. So add a few more cents. So basically jack squat.

Some idiots are too stupid to get the tendency to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the costs by this administration.

But basically May 2008 John McCain was right, drilling does jack squat. (does help the ol’ 401K though)

Hilariously, fakes like Zap just hosing Obama (actually calling him a P.O.S. )for having the same sensible postition based on govt. reports that the President (or zap, or flamer, or glenn beck) can’t be bothered to read.[/quote]

Yes, not drilling for oil will help our oil supply. ANWR holds a significant amount of oil and should be exploited.

Phony numbers don’t change reality. The federal group that put together your numbers are likely the same guys tha made the false claim that ANWR was right in th emiddle of vital caribou breeding grounds.

Reality trumps someone fiddling with the stats.

56

[quote]100meters wrote:
…

And no govt not the problem, logistics,exploring and infrastructure the actual problem, hence the decade or two to see the 75 cent reduction in a barrel of oil which equals a penny or 2 at the pump. 20 years from now. So please stop hyping this horseshit already.[/quote]

Complete and utter crap.

57

This is absolutely surreal.

http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/index.html#a

54ef44,2008-06-18

[i]

Urgent: House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries
Per Pergram-Capitol Hill
House Democrats responded to President’s Bush’s call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.

Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.
They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow.

At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that “there were multiple reasons for the postponement” including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.

Here are the highlights from briefing:

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling
1115
We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.
Hinchey on why they postponed the Appropriations markup
1119
I think there aren’t enough votes for the Peterson amendment. It wasn’t taken up (the Interior spending bill) because of the omnibus Appropriations bill. That’s the main focus of the Appropriations Committee.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)
1116
They (Republicans) have a one-trick pony approach.
Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV), Chairman of the Resources Committee
1106
You cannot drill your way out of this.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chairman of the House Select Committee on Global Warming
1111
The White House has become a ventriloquist for the oil and gas energy. The finger should be directed back at them. They had plenty of opportunity to (arrange an energy policy). But they did not put an energy policy in place.
Markey
1123
The governors of California and the governors of Florida are going to scream this is not the way to go.
Hinchey
1125
There are a lot of arrows in the President’s quiver that he decided not use.
Hinchey
1128
What we do has to be in the interest of the American people. Not major corporations.
Emanuel
1131
It’s like when I talk to my kids. Before we’re going to talk about dessert, we’ve got to talk about what’s on your plate. I hope I’m a little more successful with the oil industry than I am with my kids.
Markey7
1132
There are so many red herrings out there they might as well construct an aquarium.
From House Majoirity Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) when I asked him if the markup was cancelled because of potential Democratic defections on the Peterson amendment…

“No. The reason the markups aren’t going through is because we’re trying to get the supplemental on the floor tomorrow.”
Andfrom a Senior Republican House Appropriations Aide…

"There were multiple reasons for the postponement including ongoing negotiations on the (supplemental) and a (Democratic) wish to avoid debate and votes on the energy amendments.
[/i]

58

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
This is absolutely surreal.

http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/index.html#a54ef44,2008-06-18

[i]

Urgent: House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries
Per Pergram-Capitol Hill
House Democrats responded to President’s Bush’s call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.
Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

They also reasserted that the reason the Appropriations Committee markup (where the vote on the amendment to lift the ban) was cancelled so they could focus on preparing the supplemental Iraq spending bill for tomorrow.

At an off-camera briefing, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the same. And a senior Republican House Appropriations Committee aide adds that “there were multiple reasons for the postponement” including discussion on the supplemental. But the aide said there was the thought that Democrats may wish to avoid a debate today on energy amendments.

Here are the highlights from briefing
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), member of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the most-ardent opponents of off-shore drilling
1115
We (the government) should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.
Hinchey on why they postponed the Appropriations markup
1119
I think there aren’t enough votes for the Peterson amendment. It wasn’t taken up (the Interior spending bill) because of the omnibus Appropriations bill. That’s the main focus of the Appropriations Committee.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL)
1116
They (Republicans) have a one-trick pony approach.
Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV), Chairman of the Resources Committee
1106
You cannot drill your way out of this.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chairman of the House Select Committee on Global Warming
1111
The White House has become a ventriloquist for the oil and gas energy. The finger should be directed back at them. They had plenty of opportunity to (arrange an energy policy). But they did not put an energy policy in place.
Markey
1123
The governors of California and the governors of Florida are going to scream this is not the way to go.
Hinchey
1125
There are a lot of arrows in the President’s quiver that he decided not use.
Hinchey
1128
What we do has to be in the interest of the American people. Not major corporations.
Emanuel
1131
It’s like when I talk to my kids. Before we’re going to talk about dessert, we’ve got to talk about what’s on your plate. I hope I’m a little more successful with the oil industry than I am with my kids.
Markey7
1132
There are so many red herrings out there they might as well construct an aquarium.
From House Majoirity Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) when I asked him if the markup was cancelled because of potential Democratic defections on the Peterson amendment…

“No. The reason the markups aren’t going through is because we’re trying to get the supplemental on the floor tomorrow.”
Andfrom a Senior Republican House Appropriations Aide…

"There were multiple reasons for the postponement including ongoing negotiations on the (supplemental) and a (Democratic) wish to avoid debate and votes on the energy amendments.
[/i][/quote]

Good God. Anyone who thinks that the US is not being pushed into collectivism, is blind. This shit is scary.

Chavez wold aprove…

59

We shouldn’t drill for oil, we should nationalize the oil companies!

60

Wow. Are they serious? This is unprecedented. And, yeah, a little scary.