Aren't they just fighting themselves? At least from the viewpoint of Logic?
Now we see Russia invading Georgia for Oil!
They (and communists in general) have been the darling of the left. Anti-business and all.
Russia has plenty of oil, but doesn't want to loose Georgia as a customer who buys from them! Georgia has oil and wants energy independance. Are the communists just greedy as well as dictatorial?
Please give your views on the above issues.
Michael Savage says ';Liberalism is a mental disorder';. The more I see and hear from the Left, the more I believe he has a verifiable case.
The Left constantly complains that nations fight wars for oil. The Left prevents us from drilling for oil here
Best question ever!!!!
Communism can only compete with western democracies IF they're able to usurp natural resources by force!!! Putin is trying to squash the bug and re-coup all his marbles. And the left in this country is rooting for him.
I long for the days when the left in this country felt more passionate about democracy and the rights of free speech instead of international rights of self determination, even by oppressive regimes. The left in this country has voiced more passionate feeling for letting Saddam keep Iraqis under his thumb then they ever voiced about preserving fragile democracy in a former Soviet region.
The Left constantly complains that nations fight wars for oil. The Left prevents us from drilling for oil here
Perhaps thinking through the issues is too complex for some conservatives. There is no simplistic answer to our energy problems and comparing objecting to wars for oil to ruining our environment for very little actual gain is a simplistic approach. It also doesn't take into account the lack of adequate inquiry into why the oil companies are stockpiling millions of acres of public land and object to ';use it or lose it'; legislation.
Your analysis of the Russia/Georgia situation points out the similarities with Bush's Iraq War and doesn't help your case against liberals.
On the issue of fighting themselves that goes on and on. Right now they see an opportunity to push their environmental agenda on America but oddly it's the same environmentalist that put road blocks in the way. Can't have wind farms in migration pattern of the speckled purple warbler now can we?
Communist Russia wants total control of oil since it's the money maker, heck they even ';arrested'; the biggest oil tycoon in their country. Conveniently his company came under government control.
Because the political leftists are simply western communists. Look at how Speaker Pelosi has said that she will not allow an up-or-down vote on offshore drilling, like she's some kind of tyrant. She is the the leader of a freely-elected democratic legislature yet she acts like Stalin.
Speaking of things reminiscent of Stalin, it is the democrats who are trying to resurrect the misnamed 'fairness doctrine' because they cannot stand any speech that they disagree with. The democrats' blatant hatred of capitalism is another example, with their demonization of oil companies as 'Big Oil.' But that's par for the course when the leftist party is funded by trial lawyers and union leaders.
1. Since there is no gas shortage to drive up prices anywhere in the country - why gift our protected areas to the Oil industry over the run up of speculators buying futures?
2. Why not end the Enron loophole that hides the speculators that are trading oil futures?
3. Maybe if the Bush administration had not offered Georgia a fast track NATO membership in July, Russia would not have strong-armed Georgia in August. Do you think Russia will ever permit a NATO member on their doorstep?
you know, the world would be better off without people like you. You should rephrase ';people that disagree with me have mental disorders';.
anyway... im a liberal and guess what... IM OK WITH OFFSHORE DRILLING :o *GASP* dare he? O NOES!
If you would stop bashing my ideology, you might stop and realize you have potential allies even among the other side of the fence. But you're statements already prove to me that ';Conservatives are full of themselves';
i can make rash generalizations too.
Again this isn't a left vs. right issue. We do fight other nations for oil. I am all for drilling oil in our own country because this will give us less dependence, in the mean time, on foreign oil and give us a chance to still explore alternative energy methods. Even though the electric car was created in the mid-90s.
or maybe you are so trained to respond to Buzz words and external stimuli that you don't realize when you are being used?
Yes, the all powerful ';left.'; Why do you resist us? Resistance is futile.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Why doesn't Barack Obama want to build more Nuclear power plants and drill for more oil and natural gas?
Plus he wants to raise the taxes on Oil even higher, What is his problemWhy doesn't Barack Obama want to build more Nuclear power plants and drill for more oil and natural gas?
It seems to me that a basic step along the road to the socialism he seeks is to control the economy to the point that the masses rush into the streets demanding that the oil industry be nationalized, along with health care. Then can come the housing industry, food industry, etc. That's where the democrats want to take this government - and you and me along with it. I don't want to go and that's the only reason I'll be voting for McCain.Why doesn't Barack Obama want to build more Nuclear power plants and drill for more oil and natural gas?
Oil companies have been receiving tax credits for developing alternative fuels and building new refineries. These companies have taken the credits and have done nothing. They a currently have the largest profits due to speculative trading on the commodities market. Obama wants to tax their profits and take away their credits. The republicans don't want this to happen.
As for building nuclear power plants, no one wants on in their back yard. Drilling for more oil and natural gas won't matter. There isn't a shortage of oil, we haven't reach 'peak oil' yet.
Because much of the reasoning behind the ';Environmental Agenda'; has nothing to do with helping the Environment,it has to do with pulling the US economy down a notch or two. Funny how we are constantly being berated for not being more like Europe,yet when we want to do things Europe is doing like getting more of our power through Nuclear Power,suddenly we apparently need to be less like Europe??
And of course the rest of the world is expanding drilling and production of Oil and Natrural Gas,but apparently all of a sudden we're supposed to be less like the rest of the world on that too. Let's forget the fact that there is so much untapped Oil out there now that it would take us another Century to use it,instead lets destroy our economy utterly searching for ';alternatives'; 99% of which are thirty years away from being useful or affordable!!
But McCain is no better on this,because Obama and him both serve the same masters in the long run. This destruction of America's economy,its sovereignty,and its security are exactly what some people want. And we continue to help that agenda by voting for the pre-selected puppets like Obama and McCain. Instead we need to reject them utterly,and at least begin the process of taking our country back. But instead we keep acting like Sheep,who continue voting for the butcher,then wondering how we ended up in the slaughterhouse!
NObama 08
No To Juan McCain 08
August 4 President
Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) - all presidential candidates - support legislation that would cap greenhouse gas emissions and provide incentives to power companies to build more nuclear plants.
Geeze you guys can't even get semi-accurate lies to spin anymore.
C'mon, guy. He is just fakin'. Axelrod is an Exelon man, the largest nuclear company in the world and oil companies are funding his campaign. When will you learn to recognize an empty rhetoric from the truth? They're all for political positioning as what he is used to do.
He has no idea what he's doing. He doesn't understand the economy. He doesn't care. The GOP has wanted to drill so he can't agree with them on anything - ';screw the country!'; is his attitude!
Taxing oil is the biggest problem of all since the oil companies will just pass the tax onto us - raising prices. Is he ignorant or stupid?
Obama is out of touch. He is hemmed in by Democrat orthodoxy: Energy bad, people bad, America bad. Snail darter good, ruffed grouse good, terrorist good.
Obama would rather raise taxes, try to bankrupt the oil companies who will pass on any taxes to us, lie to the American voters and most of all say it is all Bush's fault.
Something about ';an inhabitable planet';... silly to you cons, I know, but there it is...
I believe you are incorrect. He wants plentiful, cheap energy for all Christian American brothers and sisters.
He wants to destroy the America we know.
Because the people he represents don't want it.
Got your spoon out and stirring up trouble, huh?
because if he said he wants it then it means no more money for him!concealer
It seems to me that a basic step along the road to the socialism he seeks is to control the economy to the point that the masses rush into the streets demanding that the oil industry be nationalized, along with health care. Then can come the housing industry, food industry, etc. That's where the democrats want to take this government - and you and me along with it. I don't want to go and that's the only reason I'll be voting for McCain.Why doesn't Barack Obama want to build more Nuclear power plants and drill for more oil and natural gas?
Oil companies have been receiving tax credits for developing alternative fuels and building new refineries. These companies have taken the credits and have done nothing. They a currently have the largest profits due to speculative trading on the commodities market. Obama wants to tax their profits and take away their credits. The republicans don't want this to happen.
As for building nuclear power plants, no one wants on in their back yard. Drilling for more oil and natural gas won't matter. There isn't a shortage of oil, we haven't reach 'peak oil' yet.
Because much of the reasoning behind the ';Environmental Agenda'; has nothing to do with helping the Environment,it has to do with pulling the US economy down a notch or two. Funny how we are constantly being berated for not being more like Europe,yet when we want to do things Europe is doing like getting more of our power through Nuclear Power,suddenly we apparently need to be less like Europe??
And of course the rest of the world is expanding drilling and production of Oil and Natrural Gas,but apparently all of a sudden we're supposed to be less like the rest of the world on that too. Let's forget the fact that there is so much untapped Oil out there now that it would take us another Century to use it,instead lets destroy our economy utterly searching for ';alternatives'; 99% of which are thirty years away from being useful or affordable!!
But McCain is no better on this,because Obama and him both serve the same masters in the long run. This destruction of America's economy,its sovereignty,and its security are exactly what some people want. And we continue to help that agenda by voting for the pre-selected puppets like Obama and McCain. Instead we need to reject them utterly,and at least begin the process of taking our country back. But instead we keep acting like Sheep,who continue voting for the butcher,then wondering how we ended up in the slaughterhouse!
NObama 08
No To Juan McCain 08
August 4 President
Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) - all presidential candidates - support legislation that would cap greenhouse gas emissions and provide incentives to power companies to build more nuclear plants.
Geeze you guys can't even get semi-accurate lies to spin anymore.
C'mon, guy. He is just fakin'. Axelrod is an Exelon man, the largest nuclear company in the world and oil companies are funding his campaign. When will you learn to recognize an empty rhetoric from the truth? They're all for political positioning as what he is used to do.
He has no idea what he's doing. He doesn't understand the economy. He doesn't care. The GOP has wanted to drill so he can't agree with them on anything - ';screw the country!'; is his attitude!
Taxing oil is the biggest problem of all since the oil companies will just pass the tax onto us - raising prices. Is he ignorant or stupid?
Obama is out of touch. He is hemmed in by Democrat orthodoxy: Energy bad, people bad, America bad. Snail darter good, ruffed grouse good, terrorist good.
Obama would rather raise taxes, try to bankrupt the oil companies who will pass on any taxes to us, lie to the American voters and most of all say it is all Bush's fault.
Something about ';an inhabitable planet';... silly to you cons, I know, but there it is...
I believe you are incorrect. He wants plentiful, cheap energy for all Christian American brothers and sisters.
He wants to destroy the America we know.
Because the people he represents don't want it.
Got your spoon out and stirring up trouble, huh?
because if he said he wants it then it means no more money for him!
What 3 companies get to drill into the oil called Bakken gusher in Montana?
It's all public information, my friend. Bill Barrett was big, but he sold his leases to Oasis, now it seems to be mostly Marathon, Oasis and Nance. It's not limited to three, it's whoever leased the land from the mineral owners.
The oil companies have been leasing that land since the 50's. There was an oil boom in the Williston Basin in the late 70's. Now with HDD, they are uncapping wells and drilling sectionally.
The biggest well to date is in Parshall, ND. North Dakota isn't taxing the hell out of everything like Montana, although Montana recently gave an 18 month '; tax holiday'; to oil companies drilling in the Bakken.
For years it was called the Williston Basin, so if you want to research, use that term as well.
The oil companies have been leasing that land since the 50's. There was an oil boom in the Williston Basin in the late 70's. Now with HDD, they are uncapping wells and drilling sectionally.
The biggest well to date is in Parshall, ND. North Dakota isn't taxing the hell out of everything like Montana, although Montana recently gave an 18 month '; tax holiday'; to oil companies drilling in the Bakken.
For years it was called the Williston Basin, so if you want to research, use that term as well.
America needs to drill for oil? Well how much oil will we lose if Palins Alaska is no longer a US state?
Maybe she just wants to be a part of Russia.
America needs to drill for oil? Well how much oil will we lose if Palins Alaska is no longer a US state?
Palin and her husband want Alaska to secede from the USA. He belongs to Alaska Independence Party and she has close ties to it. They want to be their own country and keep all resources for themselves. They don't like that most of the land up there is owned by the Federal Government which is as it should be since the US taxpayer bought the land from Russia, protects it from Russia, built the roads and the pipelines and pays to maintain the public lands and resources.
Palin ran for governor on the slogan, Alaska First! That is why the Country First slogan that the GOP was using at the GOP convention is so suspect. Which country? Russia?
Because 20 guys on snowmobiles could take Alaska if it wasn't under the US umbrella.
I am also scratching my head about how every Alaskan gets a revenue check from the oil every year when all the states paid to build the pipeline and the infrastructure but Alaska gets millions for these Bridges to Nowhere from the US taxpayer.America needs to drill for oil? Well how much oil will we lose if Palins Alaska is no longer a US state?
Come up with a Question that makes sense,All you Obama supporters stupid or just acting?
Get real if the Southern States couldn't break away from the U.S.A. what makes you think Alaska could.
WHat if there is a 10.0 and the US falls into the abyss..what's your point
America needs to drill for oil? Well how much oil will we lose if Palins Alaska is no longer a US state?
Palin and her husband want Alaska to secede from the USA. He belongs to Alaska Independence Party and she has close ties to it. They want to be their own country and keep all resources for themselves. They don't like that most of the land up there is owned by the Federal Government which is as it should be since the US taxpayer bought the land from Russia, protects it from Russia, built the roads and the pipelines and pays to maintain the public lands and resources.
Palin ran for governor on the slogan, Alaska First! That is why the Country First slogan that the GOP was using at the GOP convention is so suspect. Which country? Russia?
Because 20 guys on snowmobiles could take Alaska if it wasn't under the US umbrella.
I am also scratching my head about how every Alaskan gets a revenue check from the oil every year when all the states paid to build the pipeline and the infrastructure but Alaska gets millions for these Bridges to Nowhere from the US taxpayer.America needs to drill for oil? Well how much oil will we lose if Palins Alaska is no longer a US state?
Come up with a Question that makes sense,All you Obama supporters stupid or just acting?
Get real if the Southern States couldn't break away from the U.S.A. what makes you think Alaska could.
WHat if there is a 10.0 and the US falls into the abyss..what's your point
My cat'Kevin Matthews'is addicted to Dallas.He won`t take off his JR stetson and now he`s drilling for oil...
In the back garden...What should i do?My cat'Kevin Matthews'is addicted to Dallas.He won`t take off his JR stetson and now he`s drilling for oil...
Is he a catalytic converter then!My cat'Kevin Matthews'is addicted to Dallas.He won`t take off his JR stetson and now he`s drilling for oil...
Ha ha I couldn't resist, keep up the good work and cheers for the points. Report Abuse
Help him. You never know, he might find some.
Hang a sign on the back of your car saying ';Has anyone seen how fast those things can dig?
Drag him inside, sit him down and make him watch Dynasty.
when he strikes oil sale it and make a fortune
Help.
Beat the sense into him.
Let him dig
go help them doe doe.
threaten him with sue-ellen's gin bottle
if that doesnt work make sure you get drilling rights he might strike it rich
Is he a catalytic converter then!My cat'Kevin Matthews'is addicted to Dallas.He won`t take off his JR stetson and now he`s drilling for oil...
Ha ha I couldn't resist, keep up the good work and cheers for the points. Report Abuse
Help him. You never know, he might find some.
Hang a sign on the back of your car saying ';Has anyone seen how fast those things can dig?
Drag him inside, sit him down and make him watch Dynasty.
when he strikes oil sale it and make a fortune
Help.
Beat the sense into him.
Let him dig
go help them doe doe.
threaten him with sue-ellen's gin bottle
if that doesnt work make sure you get drilling rights he might strike it rich
Oil reserves = offshore drilling?
T^T help me out..pleaseOil reserves = offshore drilling?
Yes there is more oil available to us if we drill off shore. But what almost never gets mentioned is that if you start planning today to put in new wells, it will be 7 years before we see a single drop of oil from the first well. And it would be 2020 before we are getting enough from new wells to significantly affect the amount we import.Oil reserves = offshore drilling?
Do to previous drilling and seismographic work, we know for sure there are oil reserves under the ocean or in offshore drilling.
So long as it's not in a nature preserve or in one of the Great Lakes- I will go along. If it's intended in those places I will not leave our politicians alone until a the vote is over.
If I understand your question, you're asking whether these two things are the same: they aren't.
Oil Reserves: To my knowledge, this refers to oil we have sitting in reserve, available to go to refineries in the event that other sources of crude oil are no longer available. These would keep us going for a while but would likely be severely rationed.
Offshore drilling: we know that there are multiple offshore sites that have oil. During the summer when Congress was due to break for recess, the Republicans wanted to stay and get an UP or DOWN vote on offshore drilling. Nancy Pelosi shut down the Senate and literally had the lights turned off. The Republicans refused to leave, demanding that Democrats come back and continue discussing the topic. This was during the time when we were at $4.00 plus per gallon, and lawmakers wanted to get relief going. It put a tremendous amount of pressure on the Democrats, who were rightly seen as more interested in party politics than in helping the American consumer.
Then there are the oil leases that were mentioned in the debate tonight. Oil companies have drilling leases but (and I got this from Limbaugh's site) they're apparently too short to allow for EPA rules and test drilling. This could be resolved by Congress but Congress doesn't want to allow the drilling in the first place, so they've created an impossible situation.
Yes there is more oil available to us if we drill off shore. But what almost never gets mentioned is that if you start planning today to put in new wells, it will be 7 years before we see a single drop of oil from the first well. And it would be 2020 before we are getting enough from new wells to significantly affect the amount we import.Oil reserves = offshore drilling?
Do to previous drilling and seismographic work, we know for sure there are oil reserves under the ocean or in offshore drilling.
So long as it's not in a nature preserve or in one of the Great Lakes- I will go along. If it's intended in those places I will not leave our politicians alone until a the vote is over.
If I understand your question, you're asking whether these two things are the same: they aren't.
Oil Reserves: To my knowledge, this refers to oil we have sitting in reserve, available to go to refineries in the event that other sources of crude oil are no longer available. These would keep us going for a while but would likely be severely rationed.
Offshore drilling: we know that there are multiple offshore sites that have oil. During the summer when Congress was due to break for recess, the Republicans wanted to stay and get an UP or DOWN vote on offshore drilling. Nancy Pelosi shut down the Senate and literally had the lights turned off. The Republicans refused to leave, demanding that Democrats come back and continue discussing the topic. This was during the time when we were at $4.00 plus per gallon, and lawmakers wanted to get relief going. It put a tremendous amount of pressure on the Democrats, who were rightly seen as more interested in party politics than in helping the American consumer.
Then there are the oil leases that were mentioned in the debate tonight. Oil companies have drilling leases but (and I got this from Limbaugh's site) they're apparently too short to allow for EPA rules and test drilling. This could be resolved by Congress but Congress doesn't want to allow the drilling in the first place, so they've created an impossible situation.
Why did Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil?
Exxon Mobil says it has begun drilling at Alaska's Point Thomson oil and gas field.
Patrick McGinn, a company spokesman, says drilling operations were launched Friday.
In February, Exxon returned eight of its Point Thomson leases that were part of 13 added to the field in 2002. Exxon had promised to drill wells and begin producing oil within four years, but no drilling occurred.
The state has been fighting with the Irving, Texas-based oil giant and other lease holders over the lack of progress there.
Alaska officials have tried to cancel the leases, but in January it did allow Exxon to drill on two leases after the company said it would start production within five years.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_exxon_poin鈥?/a>
Did everyone get that? The government was considering taking away the leases because Exxon has been sitting on this land for years.
Sounds like the biggest foes of the idea of ';Drill here, drill now, pay less'; may not be the environmentalists, but Exxon and the other oil companies themselves.
Why else would Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil? Why the wait?Why did Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil?
Its called supply and demand oil supplies are up they can make more money when supplies go down there hoping Obama will be like Bush when they create a shortage he will do nothingWhy did Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil?
Petroleum prices are way down. Demand is low. Most Alaskan oil goes to Japan and China, and right now they aren't buying much. Storing and refining is expensive. Exxon can make more money on oil from Indonesia, South America or the Persian Gulf than they can on American oil. What do they care about Alaska or the US?
Patrick McGinn, a company spokesman, says drilling operations were launched Friday.
In February, Exxon returned eight of its Point Thomson leases that were part of 13 added to the field in 2002. Exxon had promised to drill wells and begin producing oil within four years, but no drilling occurred.
The state has been fighting with the Irving, Texas-based oil giant and other lease holders over the lack of progress there.
Alaska officials have tried to cancel the leases, but in January it did allow Exxon to drill on two leases after the company said it would start production within five years.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_exxon_poin鈥?/a>
Did everyone get that? The government was considering taking away the leases because Exxon has been sitting on this land for years.
Sounds like the biggest foes of the idea of ';Drill here, drill now, pay less'; may not be the environmentalists, but Exxon and the other oil companies themselves.
Why else would Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil? Why the wait?Why did Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil?
Its called supply and demand oil supplies are up they can make more money when supplies go down there hoping Obama will be like Bush when they create a shortage he will do nothingWhy did Exxon have to be prodded into drilling for oil?
Petroleum prices are way down. Demand is low. Most Alaskan oil goes to Japan and China, and right now they aren't buying much. Storing and refining is expensive. Exxon can make more money on oil from Indonesia, South America or the Persian Gulf than they can on American oil. What do they care about Alaska or the US?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)