|
|
I go away for a few hrs and the libs tell the truth! LOL
"NEVER"
They still thing BC is their god, or is it till Obama comes along? |
|
|
...proving how it is really, pathetic liberal's who are, "irrelevant". |
|
Here is the quote referenced above, about unemployment being at "20 year high":
Patriotic Liberal writes: Saturday, June, 07, 2008 3:57 PM
This says it all..
HRC offers a full-throated endorsement of BHO. Unemployment reaches a 20 year high. Price of gas is approach $5 zone. Evidence is rolling in that Bush and the Reeps basically lied us into a war. The Republican Svengali, Karl Rove, played politics with Katrina, with national secrets, and with prosecutions. The American middle-class is tapped out, with a 2.5% foreclosure rate on homeownership.
And all you pathetic r-wingers can obsess about is the church bulletins at Barack's old parish. No wonder your team imploding--you're irrelevant.
|
|
Here is the quote referenced in my above comment that this Pathetic Liberal yahoo is a Liar----and quite ignorant to boot:
"Patriotic Liberal writes:
Saturday, June, 07, 2008 3:57 PM
This says it all..
HRC offers a full-throated endorsement of BHO. Unemployment reaches a 20 year high. Price of gas is approach $5 zone. Evidence is rolling in that Bush and the Reeps basically lied us into a war. The Republican Svengali, Karl Rove, played politics with Katrina, with national secrets, and with prosecutions. The American middle-class is tapped out, with a 2.5% foreclosure rate on homeownership.
And all you pathetic r-wingers can obsess about is the church bulletins at Barack's old parish. No wonder your team imploding--you're irrelevant."
footnote:
There has been NO EVIDENCE (not from any sane individual) that, "Bush lied us into a war".
And the "Rockefeller Report" of this past week is simply one more report substantiating that there was NO LIE as alleged by Pathetic Liberal.
And, Rockefeller is a Liberal, respected by democrats.
|
|
...just the other day declared that unemployment is right now at its highest in 20 years.
A flat out lie.
And illustrative of his incredible ignorance.
|
|
France, that beloved country of, Leftists, U.S. Democrats (for its socialist models) receives 75% of it's country's electricity demands from Nuclear power.
The Democrat Party has been sympathetic to; has kowtowed to environmental extremists for several decades now.
These same environmental extremists have successfully persuaded Democrats---for years now---to refrain from any drilling near ANWR and off our southeast coasts.
FACT:
Democrats love the narrative that if we started projects in ANWR, we would not see the fruits of these labors for 10 years---that is correct-----HOWEVER, had we started 10-15 years ago, as conservatives desired to, we would, RIGHT NOW, be extracting oil from ANWR and from other areas that DEMOCRATS have successfully stifled.
FACT:
Even CHINA is allowed to drill 50 miles off the coasts of Florida---and are doing just that, but not the U.S.
FACT:
Environmental extremists---pandered to by DEMOCRATS were successful in decimating the logging industry in the Pacific Northwest---because of claims that the Spotted Owl's habitat was being destroyed ---and hence their populations.
NOT TRUE-------SCIENTISTS all agree now that the Spotted Owl was being destroyed by another, predator owl, which was introduced into the Spotted Owl's habitat by other conditions brought about directly by irresponsible environmnental extremist's actions.
Environmental extremists are provided much energy by Democrats. And much of this has resulted in negative outcomes.
Long hindering worthy oil exploration is merely one negative byproduct of enviro-extremism. |
|
So then, when those in Alaska, including its representatives are calling for exploration in Alaska, why is it being blocked? If the representative of Alaska comes forward AGAIN and asks to drill in Alaska, will you support him? Doubt it.
And as far as pollution impacting the environment, I can't think of a more desolate out of the way place where drilling would not impact on people living there I can't imagine of a better place than ANWR, as there aren't too many people living there. |
|
High price of oil is largely a function of the eroded dollar, which falls on Bush and the Reeps. And on the lack of prescience that led Reagan to dismantle Carter's far-sighted energy policies.
It heralded a new era of "conservatism," and now that era is coming to a screeching close. No one is going to believe that "Congress" is responsible for $5/gallon gas. Why should they? It isn't true. |
|
I know Col, but I do enjoy slapping them around and reading some of these foolish answers. (-:
Libs wonder why Air America failed.. Your reading what the people here would do if they ran oil corps.
Get out your mule.
|
|
"What? Do you think they want to throw money into a costly capital investment only to come up short in their ROI? I don't think so."
Someone made the argument that "big oil" produce and sell at cost.
Interesting for-profit business theory: go into business to sell goods and services at cost. I must have missed class when this concept was taught in business school. |
|
|
I know arguing with Briggs, Brob, et.al is fun, but it is pointless. Briggs advocacy for a Marxist approach to the oil business is DOA so why bother. The "Dead Pool" on Marxist economies overflowed decades ago yet the true believers hold on. |
|
If ANWAR is a bust why do the oil companies want to drill there?
What? Do you think they want to throw money into a costly capital investment only to come up short in their ROI? I don't think so.
Common sense is a wonderful thing. If there is a business case for drilling in ANWAR, they will come. I think they will if given the "go-ahead" by a Congress that hasn't done a single thing to increase domestic energy production. Thank you Nancy and Harry for all your vapid rhetoric in '06. |
|
|
who asks "When will it dent the price?" Well, when the heck are we going to have viable, affordable alternative energy? Hybrids are great, but they still need gas. Totally electric cars go about 40 mph max, plus they cost an arm and a leg. You also need electricity, which needs oil. When people against oil exploration start backing nuke energy, then I'll listen. Until then, you are not worth the time. I don't know. Maybe we need $8 a gallon gas to get the market working towards solutions. |
|
|
Why do we need to wean ourselves OFF something that we need, that is plentiful, and that we can produce ourselves (if Democrats would get out of the way)? Perhaps you're idealistic about the environment or something, but consider that people who think like you, cause hundreds of millions of people to suffer and even die. OIL. It's a good thing. It's intrinsic to the ~@!#~@! computer you wrote and sent your comments from. PLEASE just leave the thinking to the rest of us. |
|
Joe's inaugural comment on this post, that "Who ever pivots first on oil EXPLORATION Will win this election. Not only the White House, but also gain in House and Senate", is spot on.
Exploiting America's reserves will (and should) be the big issue in this campaign, I dare say bigger than the War in Iraq and terrorism generally, even for conservative Republicans. Plus it's a winning opening for Republicans to finally bring the overrated Environmentalist Lobby down to size.
If there's any doubt, remember that come October & November, everyone will start having to pay for home heating oil again, and that immense price increase over last year will undoubetdly enrage the voters all the more.
|
|
The WSJournal today has compelling and frank assessments of the strategic and political issues associated with the high gas price, and the refusal of Democrats to see the elephant in the room: exploiting America's untapped reserves. Dan Henninger is especially persuasive. (Check out Fred Barnes too in the June 16 Weekly Standard)
Trouble is, McCain has long been one of the environmentalist lobby's favorite Republicans. I think if he refuses to come to his senses and run on a policy of ANWR and off-shore drilling, you might well see alot of Republicans stay at home (including me), especially if our success in Iraq means that that issue is less compelling (and at the rate our guys are garnering success after success in Iraq, and with no end in sight to increases in gas prices, terrorism and the War in Iraq may well not be the chief issue come November, even for conservative Republicans).
The poll numbers are there, but neither candidate, including the "tough" McCain, wants to display any backbone to stand up for the middle class against the now-politically vulnerable environmentalist lobby (and their acolytes in the MSM). You won't hear many, if any, stories from the NYTimes/CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/MSNBC, and least of PBS, on the relief that exploitation of American reserves would have on the price of gas, and the economy generally.
Can we, your faithful listeners, ask or expect that you'll call on McCain to reverse his holding the same political position that you condemn the Dems for? It can't be anything but a political win/win for McCain, and Republicans on down the ticket, to make this their chief issue come November.
I'm a huge fan of yours, and want to hear you make more demands of McCain! As one commenter, "Skipper50" to this post wrote, that McCain is "'not Obama,' is losing its charm."
|
|
O-boy, here we go again.
During Clinton time, China was just starting to grow and India too. Now they growing at a huge rate 12% and sucking up much of the oil out there. If you don't know, it's not just oil. Many of our tall cranes, steel, concrete and many other items are going over there which is pushing the price up.
You should try reading more than the DNC news. |
|
|
Did you actually grow up in this country? Your views have a destinct Marxist qualitiy. |
|
JoeB131 writes: "Coal Fuel- During WWII, Germany was cut off from its petroleum supplies as the allies advanced. They were able to make up the shortfalls by converting coal into gasoline. It was an expensive production method, but worth looking into."
The US Air Force has a major project on to develop coal oil production and blend it into jet fuel over the next decade. Google "US Air Force Coal Oil" to see articles. It's a plan to reduce our military reliance on imported oil until alternatives are developed. Problem seems to be that burning coal oil, or its production, or both, produces twice the greenhouse gas of petroleum, but that's only a worry if you think that's important. |
|
"At cost, Dusty."
Briggsy, are you telling millions of Americans who own retirement accounts or receive a pension that their portfolio managers should dump oil and exploration because those stocks/funds are paying dividends or increasing in value?
I'm sure the fund managers for retirement accounts of Public Employee Retirement Systems will be thrilled to tell their members that "big oil" is making a profit and increasing the value of your retirement account; therefore, we need to dump big oil. |
|
|
Senator McCain is the epitome of the 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks" syndrome on both drilling for oil and global warming. Unfortunately he is also stubborn as he sides not with the middle-of -the -road democrats but with the radical, loony leftists Kennedy, Feingold, Pelosi, Reid and Schumer et al. Anyone he thinks that ANWR is a pristine paradise or another Grand Canyon is totally unaware of the facts. Obama vs Mccain what's the difference on these issues. |
|
I recently compared my future social security benefits with how my other ionvestments have done.
The government has really done wonders with my money there, huh? How have they done with yours?
Do we really want them taking over the oil business? Really? |
|
So when the price of oil went to 11 bucks per barrel, where you all for the gov helping the oil biz when they were losing money?
As I said before, you failed school.
I can only wonder, you work for the gov don't you! |
|
If it doesn't make money, it can't pay for it's self.
Did you fail school?
(commonwealth) LOL, try Russia and let me know how it's helping them.
|
|
Do yourself a very big favor. If you so think that gov run oil biz is such a great idea. Read up on Mexico and it's gov run oil ideas.
They sucked every buck out of it for everything except drilling for more oil. Their system is old and broken. |
|
Also, no drilling in ANWR until Congress establishes an oil company for this purpose to be wholly owned by the People of the United States
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HAHAHAHA, you stupid fool. Like say Medicare or say SS.
Yeah their making money arn't they!
Show me one Gov run progam that makes a dine or in fact says on budget. |
|
|
Every day, I look for some positive reason to support McCain. Haven't found it yet, and "he's not Obama" is losing its charm. |
|
|
My understanding is that from licensing and government approval to construction to certification to start up is 5-7 years if all goes well but we haven't built one in so long, who knows. The irony of nuclear power is that its biggest advocates, General Electric for instance, are the primary forces behind the push for Cap and Trade. It's such a tangled mess politically. Everyone is looking for a taxpayer handout and protection against competition. We need an energy policy that doesn't put the "fix" in for anyone. We could start by reconsidering all subsidies from zero instead of increasing one subsidy to make up for any perceived disadvantage created when someone else gets a subsidy which is how it now works. There is no accounting for how subsidies now work nor whether they actually accomplish anything other than making political cronies rich. We are dealing with an incredibly corrupt process. |
|
Lying and misleading? How would we be doing that? I guess I'm in the drill here, drill now crowd. We're not making any promises, except that we're loosening the bands on the the oil companies, mining companies, etc. to get started. Would we expect miracles? No. Should we expect it to take some time to see results? Yes. Do we need to maintain some control of where and who we are turning loose to start expoloring? Of course.
I just fail to see the downside. You said We would just be setting up another political "quagmire" of lies setting up impossible expectations. In all due respect, it has been you telling me not to act out of fear of not voting for a one-party system. This sounds like you're a little fearful yourself of failure. The alternative is to...? |
|
|
The biggest reason energy prices are where they are today is because of inflation. Of course Hugh will never admit that, but it's the main cause of skyrocketing prices. Yes GW Bush has screwed the pooch on this. He'a allowed the Federal Reserve to print an unlimited amount of money out of thin air. The deficits haven't helped as well. We can thank all our GOP reps for really holding to that platform of smaller government when we had all the power for six years(snark). We are reaping what we have sown. |
|
|
How long to get nuke plants up, running, and online? |
|
|
Hey, switchgrass, sugarcane, dandelions...whatever...let's do it! However, we gotta get past Iowa, no? |
|
|
Theoretically, yes we could drill in one or two years. But the fantasy the "drill here, drill now" folks are buying into is that the manpower and equipment to do that exists. There is a world shortage of oil platforms and qualified workers to start with. Many of the rigs that survived Katrina were transferred to the ME and the world capacity for building new ones is limited. There are so many problems with simply deciding to start drilling on a large scale that all this talk about drilling bringing down prices is silly talk. We need to make the decision to start drilling but I just don't see how we can maintain a national will to continue for very long if everyone is expecting immediate results. We would just be setting up another political "quagmire" of lies setting up impossible expectations. We can't lie our way to virtue. Every time we get caught lying and misleading, it halts progress. The "drill here, drill now" crowd is only concerned about winning an election in November by any means necessary. |
|
Although I don't like paying higher prices for gasoline, I have to disclose that I own mutual funds that are geared towards oil and exploration so I do want to see those funds do well because it increases the value of my retirement/investment accounts. Plus, I don't mind the dividends--which are reinvested anyway.
I understand that "big oil" stocks and funds are a significant portion of retirement and pension funds throughout the US. So, do we really want to devalue these retirement accounts and pension funds by taxing these companies and forcing them to operate at mediocrity or at a loss?
Finally, our "big oil" companies aren't exactly big compared to other oil companies throughout the world. I also own Petrobras and was surprised to learn that PB is about the same size as ExxonMobil--which is ranked around 20th in the world. |
|
|
Gee Kimberly do you think commercial jets, military equipment like tanks, ships, planes, major factories all across the US (oil is used to make myriads of products not to mention run machinery) are all going to be run on biodiesel vegetable oil ? Please wake up from your la-la land dream world. |
|
BTW, regarding your take on biofuels, ethanol is viable--in Brazil. Brazil produces sugar cane like we produce weeds. Wonder why we won't permit import of sugar cane without tariffs but we'll subsidize the production of corn for conversion to ethanol, which is 4 times as inefficient as sugar cane? Perhaps Iowa and similar states have way too much influence on our primaries, no?"
It's very simple. Iowa is the first caucus. So all these politicians praise the virtues of Corn Ethanol, even though its the most inefficient method, even though it drives up the costs of other foods.
Give you an example. White Corn, which is a staple of Mexican diet, is linked to the costs of Yellow Corn, which is used in Ethanol. Since the price supports keep corn unnaturally high in price, it's driving a lot of Mexicans into poverty just to eat, which is why a lot of them come here to the consternation of the VA Pats and Pasadena Phils of the world who live in mortal terror that Pacho is going to date their sisters.
Something that would really be worth exploring is making ethanol from switchgrass, which can produce 1000 gallons of ethanol per acre compared to 400 for corn or 650 for sugar cane. Better, it requires almost no maintenance. It's just a matter of finding a more efficient conversion method. |
|
...so predictable, oil drilling now would have no impact on oil production now...duh! But you have been maintaining this mantra for over 15 years! If we had begun to use our resources - not just oil, but also nuclear and coal - as we SHOULD HAVE FROM WAY BACK WHEN, we would certainly be much better off and much more energy independent.
But thank you Neo Kommie obstructionists for making sure we are incresingly enslaved to foreign powers as our own powerlesness increases. |
|
Why not we all print out maps of the US, with the large oil fields plainly marked - then send them to each in the house and seante with big letters on the maps: DRILL HERE, IDOTS.
Make sure McCain and Obama gets extra large maps and print. |
|
been saying "it will take 10 years" to get new oil on-line for about 20 years now ...
In a pinch oil can be drilled and pumping in less than a year on land and less than 2 years in the ocean ...
If you "no more oil" folks are right we can start drilling now and it will be ten years before the "new" oil comes on-line ... by then your "new" forms of energy will either have been developed or will prove to be just another scam.
I for one don't trust your judgement about these "new" sources of energy and would like some more good old oil on hand to drive my car and heat my house with.
So consider drilling now as the backup plan for your "new" sources of energy ideas just in case they don't pan out.
I'll agree to tax dollars going to these wonderful "renewable" sources of energy if you'll agree to let us drill everywhere.
:) |
|
Agree wholeheartedly, but we can't just take this lying down. We are a great country and have the know how and the desire to fix this proble if the clowns in Washington would untie our hands. It's only a matter of time before the trucking industry will shedule a Boston Gas Party and dump all of their gas into Boston Harbor ala the Boston Tea Party.
We recovered from that and we will recover from this, but it is going to take conservatives to speak up, hound there congressmen and senators about our desire to explore any and all sources of energy; elect representatives and senators who actually undersatand the problem and then hold their feet to the fire.
It is not that complicated and we can do it. This country gave the world most of the greatest technological inventions we all enjoy, we put a man on the moon. We certainly have the ability to find a way of extracting some oil that's underneath a polar bear's butt.
It's happen. Maybe if the Cubs win the World Series it will show the world that anything's possible. It happened for my beloved Red Sox - it can happen in Chicago. |
|
It is a wrong to assume that futures prices of oil would go down if Congress got out of the way of domestic drilling. The futures market is worried about the availability of oil in 6 months, 5-10 years from now is an eternity and along the way, the growth rate for oil demand continues to accelerate so prices have nowhere to go but up. Even in 5 years (at the earliest), the new oil would simply be displacing the more expensive oil (and that's assuming the world handled the five years of demand growth while prices kept rising).
We absolutely must drill domestically but our politicians are being blatantly dishonest with these charts that show what the price of gas would be if we started drilling. It just aint so. The only thing that will lower oil prices is a global depression. Otherwise, oil prices will go much higher before any "bubble" bursts and the post-bubble price will be much higher than today's prices.
The point is we have to start solving the problem but let's not go off on another false premise. We have too many of those already thanks to our entrenched criminal class of elected weasels. |
|
The problem is that the world is UNDERutilizing its resources, not overutilizing, thanks to the economic terrorists. Much of the third world starving could be alleviated if the ecofascists would stop helping the corrupt leftist governments in Africa and Asia starve their subjugants.
Energy and freedom are needed for wealth creation. The economic terrorists are against both. Those that still perpetuate the hoax of Man-made Global Warming and act on it for economic and political gain are party to crimes against humanity. Al Gore should be prosecuted for fraud and racketeering and made an example.
We could be energy independent now if we had not been stopped by these terrorists over the past 3 decades. Our electricity would be generated by nuclear and clean coal, as oil reserves decreased, oil- and shale- to-oil technologies would be kicking in, and the Mideast would be chasing rats for meat.
"Research" on alternative "sustainable" energies has been going on for half a century, and we are still decades away from solar and hydrogen being economically and technologically feasible on a national scale, and wind is a pipe dream. We should have been drilling, refining, and building for decades; through the heads of polar bears, caribbou, and baby seals if necessary. |
|
MaineConservative,
The Democrats, Liberal Republicans and their Green allies have led us to an energy disaster. Yet our wimpy nominee agrees with them. We have 150 years of coal in this Country. Major people in the Science Community are coming out against the Global Warming craze. Where is the MSM and Mccain? They have already decided the issue. We can't drill, can't get enough Coal and Alternative energy is years off. Conservatives must take the gloves off on energy. Liberals are ruining our economic future. What do you think? |
|
Hugh, thank you for blogging on this! You're the first major blogger I've found to take up this issue, which is perhaps the most dire facing our nation right now. I have been posting on the "oil crisis" for several days now:
http://sapper.townhall.com/ |
|
Any increase in the supply, whether now or whether it takes more time to reach the market, the futures price would be affected immediately.
By the way, Kimberly, do you have somewhere to be in ten years? Bill Clinton used that excuse 10 years ago that drilling would take 10 years to actually make it into the oil supply. If we had started then, we'd now be pumping that gas in our cars. But we don't want to look that far down the road, right?
But what does it matter. Mr. "I'm a proud Reagan Conservative" McCain has said he's opposed to drilling in ANWR anyway so we'll just keep depending on countries that still use a camel as their mode of transportation. |
|
No prob Joe8131, happens to all of us.
BTW, regarding your take on biofuels, ethanol is viable--in Brazil. Brazil produces sugar cane like we produce weeds. Wonder why we won't permit import of sugar cane without tariffs but we'll subsidize the production of corn for conversion to ethanol, which is 4 times as inefficient as sugar cane? Perhaps Iowa and similar states have way too much influence on our primaries, no? |
|
Joe8131,
I think you omitted a few zeroes. |
|
It's 86 Billion barrels supposedly under the continental shelf...
not millions.
My bad. |
|
Kimberly, much of what drives up the price of oil is the trading on the futures market. If traders all of a sudden believed that the supply would significantly increase relative to demand, I don't think they would trade up.
With regards to your question about "working towards" eco-friendly sustainable energy, we do have technology that will significantly help but enviros and DEMs don't want to build nuclear power plants. |
|
Is exactly four days of usage at current rates. That is after we spend years actually drilling for it.
Yes, exploration is a good idea. But we have to decrease demand through other technologies.
If we re-instituted the 55 MPH speed limit, we'd save one BILLION barrels of oil a year.
http://kalimna.blogspot.com/2006/05/slow-down-save-oil.html
The real problem, however, is that with China and India rushing to live like Americans, the demand for oil is going to continue to outstrip demand. What is needed is to find alternative fuels.
Biofuels- We need to find a way to make ethanol viable. The current corn subsidy is a waste because corn is the least efficient biomass to make ethanol from. Sugar or switch grass would be better.
Coal Fuel- During WWII, Germany was cut off from its petroleum supplies as the allies advanced. They were able to make up the shortfalls by converting coal into gasoline. It was an expensive production method, but worth looking into. |
|
McCain now says that the Oil Companies should give back some of THEIR profits, and invest more of THEIR profits on researching alternative energy sources.
Why doesn't he ask the Corn Farmers to give back some of their profits??? Corn is at an all time high.
Why doesn't he ask the Corn Farmers to invest in alternative food sources???
It would sure be nice if the GOP would get THEIR heads out of THEIR A$$ and dump this Arrogant Socialist Liberal.
|
|
|
McCain isn't for it either, so lets be fair. OK, he pulls the kopout of let the states decide. Like most of his policy stances, he contradicts himself with his federalism when it comes to cap & trade or drilling ANWR etc. We need to get rid of ALL the bums in Congress, whether they are Dems or Reps. Both parties are letting down John and Jane Public in favor of their elitist indulgences/policies. |
|
Apparently Congress has no problem with china drilling 60 miles off the coast of Florida.
But they won't allow US access to it?
Whoever voted against this needs to be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. These arrogant buffoons are out to destroy our way of life. |
|
|
and how else will all of the unionized workers who have $$ in their pensions invested in "big Oil" be able to afford to retire at age 55? |
|
were a CONSERVATIVE, he would already be on the right side of this issue (no pun intended).
I'm STILL waiting for a GOOD reason to vote FOR Mac.
Wake me up if someone finds one. |
|
|
how else will Dick Cheny be able to afford more accurate guns? $4 a gallon gets him enough change to buy only a basic gun that doesnt shoot right.. |
|
Will win this election. Not only the White House, but also gain in House and Senate.
Oil companies are not evil. Profits are not evil. High gasoline prices are bad and they are due to bad energy policy, not lack of oil in the geological world (there is still a lot of oil out there). Bring more oil to market and the price of oil will drop.
The public wants more oil EXPLORATION (Dr. Luntz points out that "drilling" is negative but "exploration" is deemed positive). |
|