|
And a good one. This is not a Democrat or Republican thing, it is an American thing. Get bipartisan on this and get things going. |
|
|
If the Dems are thinking about drilling, you know they have to be up to something. |
|
|
|
I think I lost a bet. I bet that the Dems would fold on this issue by September, but I beleive Obama will change direction on this by July 15.
I think that ANWR will stay off the table with them to prove that they are still sens. to the environment, but that the continental shelf and the Wyoming shale will be in play.
What I find amazing is that the Dems are constantly attacking Bush while at the same time folding on all his positions. FISA, the gun ban, oil drilling, free trade and the war. McCain may be in a weird position on succeeding on all his main issues and still losing because of Bush hatred! |
|
|
I know it's hard for you to follow this, but the oil industry is a PRIVATE |
|
sorry, hit wrong button.
ANYWAY, Oil is a PRIVATE business, that plays on the WORLD stage. Why cut a break? What possible beneift would that have? if they sell oil to us at a cut rate, that won't effect the price of oil one bit. But your a socialist, and can only think of yourself. Get a real job, pay a few dollars in taxes, then we'll talk.
Your democrates folded like a house of cards. Everything the President (with a 29 percent approval, vs the 9 percent of congress) has wanted, he's gotten. INCLUDING getting general Petretus confirmed. Ha ha ha. My guy is not acting and governing likea lame duck. But the DEMOCRATE controlled congress sure is. In fact, the blessed Obama has voted with the president on the last couple of bills. Ironic,isent it? |
|
This election is all about irony. The dems position themselves for the general election and lo and behold find out the country is in fact still fairly center right.
They also find out that their union demagoguing on free trade is not much help when the main issue is low cost fuel. How would tariffs serve that. Many people don't realize this but NAFTA cut the tariff on oil imports from Mexico/Canada as a main issue.
Maybe we can tell the Saudi's to pump more oil and then slap a tariff on it. That will show those guys.
Actually though the Dems had an interesting plan though prob unworkable. If we do increase domestic production can we give a break on the sale of that oil and north american oil as opposed to Middle Eastern and Venezuela oil.
Keep on that track Dems. I like the direction. |
|
It's a trap!
This is just a stunt to try and stumble McCain. You'll notice this isn't for development of ALL domestic oil resources, only Alaska, ANWR. The one place McCain still refuses to consider drilling.
This forces him to either support drilling in a "pristine" wasteland he's vowed not to drill, or to vote against development of domestic resources. Lose-Lose situation for him.
The Democrats are still furious about the FISA situation that Obama was put in, now they want to turn the tables and put McCain in one that is just as near and dear for his "supporters". |
|
The Democratically Controlled Congress will not do anything substantial before the November elections.
The (180 on Drilling in Alaska) move is election year politics pure and simple. It's the least risky option for them, but they are still playing with a losing hand.
I think that they will propose an energy bill with enough poison in it to make it impossible to pass, and then claim that they tried.
If they pass a serious drilling bill now, the price of gas will go down substantially, and the voters will rightfully punish them for their flip flopping and foot dragging. They plan to continue to smoke screen until November to hold onto power and hope that the voters aren't sharp enough to pick up on this maneuver.
I think that the voters are so angry about this issue that will not be fooled by this and the delay until November will only add to the voter backlash.
In either case, the Democratic Party is going to take a real beating in the November elections for hurting every American's pocketbook.
|
|
Once you've found a non-fairy-tale alternative, let us all know.
Also, you should look at what would have happened if Clinton would have allowed another kind of "drilling" to take place under his watch. (Pun intended)
That whole "not a drop of oil for 7 years" argument is out the window!
My car runs on bad jokes, so I'm okay.
CasualConservative.com
|
|
Dems should be red with embarrassment. Instead they are merely slimy green because they are really socialist red.
As they duck and cover, kick 'em in the butt! |
|
|
Someone posted a comment that some environmental harm, although negligible, will occur from drilling in ANWR. What environmental damage, if any, was caused by the current Alaska pipeline? And what would be the specific environmental damage caused by drilling in ANWR? Please enlighten me. I've heard folks talk for years about the environmental damage of drilling in ANWR. But I've not heard specifically what it would be. |
|
Even when the Dems do something you agree with many of you are throwing around cheap shots. If voters do it, why should our elected representves do anything different.
This is not a political party problem it is a national problem. There are plenty of Republicans that have voted against ANWAR in the past, including MN Senator Norm Coleman. |
|
Rogue fears "This is just a stunt to try and stumble McCain."
Don't worry, Rogue, Grampa McSame is perfectly capable of stumbling on his own. Daily.
Watch Grampa try to be hip:
http://tinyurl.com/6dxrax
|
|
If McAmnesty goes down in flames, I'll be smiling the entire time. I'm a proud member of the "We're SCREWED! '08" caucus.
I'm simply stating what to me is the blindingly obvious. This isn't a change of heart, it is an attempt to ensnare McAmnesty in a similar No-win scenario B. Hussein just experienced. |
|
Drilling isn't going to help.
I happen to believe in Peak Oil. We've crossed the threshold. We, as a world, now use more oil than we will ever be able to produce. Period.
I agree that would should immediately start moving on all energy sources, including drilling (for short term relief), but in the end, drilling is futile.
There are some estimates that say we have about 300 years of oil and gas left, world wide. Even so, that's a drop in the bucket. I'd rather we start shifting over now, but not at the expense of collapsing the US economy.
peace |
|
|
Make sure Republicans take a major, outspoken role in bringing this bill to fruition, so that Dems don't get all the credit for this. |
|
|
Oh, C'mon! Go back to 1997 when the house and senate voted for ANWR drilling and Clinton vetoed it. WTF planet are you on? Typical fashion for you,MG. You'll support it, but...but f-ing but. Blame GWB every. single. time. STFU, already!! Blame Billy Jeff, cause we could have avooided this whole effing mess... Give the credit where it's really due. |
|
|
Since real solutions are, optimistically speaking, fifteen or twenty years off, I'll take ANWR now. How about this, any state that prohibits drilling off their coast doesn't get any petroleum products from any of the other fifty states, not to mention any from the Terrorist subsidizing Middle East. |
|
|
This is a setup. The Dems won't support drilling in ANWR. Maybe they will "allow" drilling in principle but establish so many regulatory anc conditional roadblocks that they will effectively keep it off limits. Of course they will get to lie to their constituents about how they supported drilling while actually blocking it. Only open question is how they use this against the GOP? |
|
I will sound strangely non-partisan here. I think the dems will start going for drilling soon for real. The trends are going to far against them on this issue.
George Bush hardly was tough promoting exploration in 2001 when oil was $17 a barrel, but most analysts could see the days od $100 oil coming. An remember Cheney's comments on conservation merely being a "lifestyle choice".
The democrats are coming around to save their political hides, but the republicans should have been focused on this for some time. Of course this is another reason why the party is in the toilet. |
|
Kimberly: Exactly what environmental damages have been done via the Alaska pipeline since its construction (using 1970's technology, no less!)?And what part of Econ101 on supply and demand don't you understand? Even Sen. Schumer admits that increasing production from Saudi's will decrease the cost at the pump.
Brian: So you believe in Peak Oil, so what! Predictions of running out of virtually any resource are routinely proved wrong, over time. Why? Because human ingenuity creates better means of utilization when the demand is present - as it is now! Read Paul Zane Pilzer for some basic economics - "Unlimited Wealth". |
|
|
Pelosi must be constantly deranged by all the spinning she has done. After all, she and her crowd have managed to turn their treason into what is good for the country. I will only believe when the first oil comes out of the spigot. |
|
Oh,wait, I thought we couldn''t 'drill' our way out of 'this mess'
They looked at the polls and presto they change their policy. What a way to lead,yep 'we are ready to lead' the lady said...just show me the opinion poles and I'll tell you where I stand.
Haven't you folks seen enough?
|
|
What do you suppose "Red" Nanny will want to tack on to a bill that almost no one will oppose? It's would seem to be the perfect vehicle for amnesty, carbon taxes, and all of the other little gems she has not managed to jam down the people's throats.
When democrats suddenly start sounding reasonable it is time to be vigilant.
BTW, "can't drill our way out of this" is, IMO, the most nonsensical statement I have ever heard. We sure can't NOT drill our way out of this. Let me point out that 300 years, if that's accurate, gives us some time to develop these, now inefficient or non-existent alternatives that everyone would like to see.
Competition on our part, coupled with oil independence will drive down the price of oil as foreign produces try to get back the U.S. market as demand here at home is reduced by domestic supplies. Fewer oil imports means a stronger dollar and a chance to work our way out of our financial down turn.
Americans need to reduce their debt and that takes more money, with real value, in their pockets, not less. Government needs to get their hands out of our pockets and get out of the way while we fix this problem. |
|
|
Last time I checked, the only drilling proposed by the Bush Administration was for ANWR and the total acreage was 2000 acres. This does make a solid case for believing that Nancy Pelosi suffers from serious dementia. |
|
It's not like an asteroid is coming to destroy us - and yet - you'd think you'd see a more energy out of congress to put together a plan. Please don't go for the pun.
Bush has a right to say, "I submitted a plan years ago and it was rejected." But maybe now is a good time to reminds us that he did. ACTUALLY - now is a great time to hammer that point. |
|
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-centrists13-2008 jul13,0,1800667.story?page=2
Like all kabuki plays, all actors are paid by the same producer. There is only one party and both candidates are bought and paid for. We are going to arrive at the same globalist, one-world-without-borders place regardless of which candidate wins.
"On immigration, faith-based social services, expanded government wiretapping, global warming and more, Obama and McCain have arrived at similar stances -- even as they have spent weeks trying to amplify the differences between them on other issues, such as healthcare and taxes.
Even on Iraq, a signature issue for both candidates, McCain and Obama have edged toward each other.
The result is that in many areas of policy, the general direction of the next White House seems already set, even if the details are not."
"The best news all year is that after competitive presidential primaries in both parties, we end up with nominees on both sides who get it on immigration," said John Gay, an official with the National Restaurant Assn. who heads a business coalition favoring a legalization plan for undocumented immigrant workers. "That was by no means a certainty when the campaign got started."
"Sen. McCain never really repudiated his [original] position," said Tamar Jacoby, who heads a business coalition called ImmigrationWorks USA. "Saying you're going to do it in phases doesn't mean you're not going to do it."
Wake up you nose-holding myrmidons. There will be no tomorrow if McCain wins. |
|
The Demonrats have twisted themselves into a bind. If they continue to resist more drilling (their mantra is "we can't drill our way to lower gas prices"), the voters will turn on them for prolonging high gas prices while we have energy sitting in the ground. On the other hand, if they flip-flop and allow drilling, then voters will still be angry because they (the Demonrats) could have allowed increased drilling long ago and avoided these high gas prices that are causing such pain now.
This is the the result of their playing politics with the energy issue instead doing what is right for this country!
The only sensible solution at this time is to expand drilling NOW, and simultaneously pursue alternative energy sources that will eventually reduce our use of fossil fuels. We are quite capable of doing both simultaneously. Or, is this concept too difficult for the Demonrats to grasp? |
|
That means drilling for more won't help. By the way, if you have been told the reserves have gone down that last month, they have. But as of April they were at the highest levels they have been since 1993, and are still higher than they have been in most of the years since then. They are going down because refineries are now refining oil they paid $100 a barrel for instead of buying $147 barrels of oil to refine. I dare any one, yes any one, to find just one article that states how a consumer or end user is having problems getting oil. You won't find it because it isn't happening.
Demand destruction in the US is as high as 825,000 barrels of oil a day and as low as 525,000 barrels of oil a day this year. Total increased demand in Asia is 515,000 barrels of oil a day this year. Saudi Arabia is pumping 500,000 more barrels a day then they were in April. So do the math (if you can righties) and you will see there is no shortage of oil. If there is no shortage, than it is not a supply and demand isssue. Sorry, when companies decide to simply use their stored reserves that are cheaper than current prices, that is not an indication of tight supplies. Also lefties, you have no argument here either, because if you argue that we need to come up with a new energy plan, well that means you too are ignoring the fact that there is no shortage. So start using your own head everyone, and don't get your info from talk radio! |
|
|
I just saw that you said increased pumping from the Saudi's would decrease prices! They are pumping 500,000 more barrels a day than they were in April and the price of oil is $17 more a barrel. What part of economics don't you understand. Oil istraded on speculative markets that don't truly reflect market forces. Over the course of a long time the market may correct itself, but it will have wreaked billions of dollars of damage before it does. Go back to school and do all of us a favor and retake econ! |
|
I've been writing my lefty congressman here in Seattle about drilling, and I got the pre-packaged rebuttal. He repeated the "We can't drill our way bla bla bla" BS they're all touting. However, he mentioned the acres and acres that ALREADY have been issued permits for exploration that the big bad oil companies are just SITTING on.
This is the canard.
The dems will say they're doing all they can, and still lay the blame on big oil. They don't tell you that the permits are only good for a year, and exploration takes longer than that. Then when it's time to apply for extensions on the year lease, the federal government bogs it down with more restrictions. The price of the permits alone make it so impractical to even apply. It's such a bureaucratic scam. |
|
Yes, but it is for the 68 million leases already leased. These leases have problems of no oil, dirty oil, or difficult to pump. The oil companies go to where they can efficiently drill for less time and more money.
We should lease all of our land and shores. It is our property, not owned by congress.
One Democrat said it would hurt the fishing industry.
In California, the jets dumping fuel put more oil into the ocean than the oil riggs.
One Democrat said drilling has failed, failed, failed. How can he say that. How did we get the gasoline today? We have gasoline and not a single waiting line. |
|
Oil companies are sitting on billions of barrels of oil which they are not using.
Approx. Barrels of Crude oil available
OCS land already leased- 40.92 billion
OCs land not leased- 18.17 billion
This is the Energy Information Agency website which list the crude oil estimates as of 2003.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html |
|
This has become a single issue election-$4.00/gal. gas prices and it's ripple effect on the economy. Politicians who get on the supply side of this early will be winners. McCain should have been all over Drilling in ANWAR weeks ago and Obama would be toast. After all, which is more desirable-oil rigs in frozen tundra that nobody visits or oil rigs off the coast of popular vacation destination coastline?
But Mccain is going to blow this opportunity and Obama is going to outflank him on this one and beat him to the punch and perhaps deal a mortal political blow in the process. If McCain cared as much about everyday Americans as he does about illegal aliens, he would have already figured this out. This is precisely why long term senators don't get to be president-they have been in Washington so long that they are simply out of touch. Whoever is advising McCain on energy policy is an idiot. 'Green' is for democrats who will never vote for a republican-no matter how moderate. Oil fuels the engine of capitalism. This was an issue that truly could have separated McCain from Obama and defined Barack Hussein Obama in a (anti-American) way that he never could have refuted or escaped from-but McCain was too busy posturing and courting liberals. |
|