Why aren't these Environmental screwballs letting us drill oil in our own country?

Do they not realize the effect that these high rate oil prices will have on our economy?Why aren't these Environmental screwballs letting us drill oil in our own country?
I think they are thinking about long term rather than short term economic and environmental values, you know for those who will inherit the earth!Why aren't these Environmental screwballs letting us drill oil in our own country?
Yes drilling there will bring prices down...





We aren't allowed to drill because it ruins the environment...





We have enough supply to last us decades and enough coal to last us over a hundred years. Thanks Congress for doing nothing on an important issue!





To Congress: Now since you have made this mess, get the oil companies exec's to capitol hill and blame them! Quit pointing fingers and do something about it yourself.
It boils down to one thing. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. The environmental screwballs are the squeakiest wheel in D.C.





Washington needs to hear us. We need to get squeaky so they'll give us some oil. (Pun intended)





As I see it, you only have three choices.


1.) Cut back on your gas consumption.


2.) Grin and bare it.


3.) Do something about it and tell your congressman how you feel. This is a letter I sent to my congressman. Pass it around. Change your representative’s name. Then when you complain, at least you can say you tried something. I equate it to those who don't vote and then complain about who's in office.





https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtm...


will put you in touch with your congressman.





Dear Representative Geoff Davis,





I believe it's time to change our policy in regards to drilling for oil off our own shores. Refuge (ANWR) and the offshore areas of the Pacific and Atlantic coasts contain a huge amount of oil that would drastically reduce (if not eliminate) our dependency on foreign oil. If we can't do anything about the vast profits ';big oil'; is raking in, at least we can allow them to reinvest these profits into weaning us off foreign oil.





Times have changed in reference to environmental protection. Modern technology minimizes the environmental impact to a point where it is practically non-existent. I'm sure legislation could be worded to ensure environmental impact is minimized.





Even if we allow drilling for more oil, I don't believe the big oil companies are really interested in finding it. Limited supply means more profit. Here are a couple of scenarios for your consideration.





Break up the oil monopoly. In my opinion they are acting together as one (not competing against each other) to drive the costs of fuel up. Break up the chain and you will produce competition. Make it unlawful for the oil companies to also own the refineries or distribution chains. When the owner of the refinery is shopping for oil, the oil companies are going to compete to get the business.





It is my understanding that OPEC really only wants ~ $68 for a barrel of oil. It’s the speculators that bid it up from there. If the government were buying the oil – it would take the speculators out of the equation. Why can’t our government buy the oil and then sell it to the refineries for or a very low profit? I am a life long republican and not usually in support a more government, I don’t think this qualifies as it could sustain itself with a very low (zero wash) profit.





Most of all, lets end “big oil” lobbying efforts in Washington. Oil is the life’s blood of this nation. Catering to their interests is unpatriotic when most of them are not even owned by Americans.





I know your knowledge probably exceeds mine in these matters. I am not an expert, just a VERY concerned citizen/voter. As our elected representative, my hope is that you can help before our nation goes into a depression. One hurricane in the gulf and we'll be in trouble.





Thank you for your help,
Because all it accomplishes is a very slight delay (10 - 20 years) of the inevitable, and at great cost. The longer you delay dealing with the inevitable the more it will cost you when you DO deal with it. When the engine light comes on in your car, do you fix the problem? or do you just stick some black tape over the light and pretend everything is OK?





Your great grandchildren are going to need to live here too someday. Try looking at where ';America %26amp; Co'; is going to be in 50 or 100 years instead of just trying to look good on this year's report. Or maybe you think cost vs benefit based analysis and long range planning is ';screwball';?
UGh we are drilling in our own Country . I personally had part in about 150 wells in the USA. most fo them offshore Gulf of mexico. There has been a huge discovery in the gulf. one of wells we drilling estimated to produce over a billion barrels per day. many that are already been drilled have been capped for futire completions and producing. all over the usa on land is drilling. where i live there is about 20 drilling rigs with in a 50 mile radius .. but we can drill more and more but do you not realize the usa hasn't built a new refinary since the 70's if we had more refinerys. then that could also help but with the huge cost of building a refinery it want lower prices over night. just drilling doesnt put gas in your car. from drilling it miles and miles benath the earths surface its a long process before it makes it to the chevron station Lot of time, Lot of Money . with the high prices your oilcampnies are also suffering do you know how much Your Oil cmapnies pay per day to drilling companies to drill these wells. anywhere from 100,000.00$ to 500,000.00$ per day plus equipment. and tools thats used is not available at walmart. And it reqires fuel and oil to drill the wells, more fuel to produce the wells, transport it, refinery costs. lot of costs in there. To many people are investing in oil to become millionaires. one person is your president and his frienfds and family if you invest a million $ in real estate in 15 years time you want to be able to gain a little there dont you. same here so many people have invested millions into oil stocks etc. well they gotta show a profit some how and the best way is with our pocket books, there is no winning this. get used to it..
I am an environmentalist whom agrees we should explore sources of oil inside of America. But the fact remains that these new drilling sites will have a tiny impact, if any, on the price of oil and our country's economy. What we really need to do is explore our other options as we try to ween ourselves off of oil as gently as possible.
because they are idiots....they think it's ok for opec countries to drill for oil...they don't care about that....like them drilling for oil is somehow not affecting ';climate change'; or hurting the enviroment.....and when we tried to get alternative energy like windmills on the ocean going, helping to aleviate our energy needs, teddy kennedy screamed bloody murder because it would be a eye sore to him personallly....they are pure evil...
environmentalist have no control over these matters,congress does,but the democrats have always been against it.but tell me why if republican are so for building new refineries,why didn't they just do it when they controlled all 3 branches of government for 6 years straight





it would have been as simple as drafted a bill voting on it and getting the president to sign it,bush didn't veto a single bill put on his desk by republicans for 6 years straight and democrats couldn't do anything they didn't have enough votes to stop anything
I think it has something with the organization Greenpeace paying off the democrats. Over the last 12 years there have been 24 votes on drilling in the Alaskan ANWR. In 1996 when the republicans had control of the house and senate, it got passed. But our dear friend and former president Clinton vetoed it. The Republican party wants to explore for oil here, but the dem's don't. I thought these politicians were to have Americans well-being at heart. Apparently not. Their main job is to get re-elected. Nothing else matters to them. You see, the democrats have put us in the position of having to buy unaffordable gasoline. They ride in limousines, and we pay for the gas.
Getting more oil now seems like a good idea, and i am in favor of drilling in alaska, don't get me wrong, but i think that if we don't at least start looking at alternative fuel sources, we will never overcome the oil crisis. We won't solve any problems that way. Just think a few years into the future. Then gas will be even more expensive than it is now. I'm sure we don't want that right?
Cause they are dumb and would rather raise food prices as well by trying to create ethanol. Which costs two times less but is also burned twice as fast, so you don't even save! Drill for oil in alaska get some more refineries running and then work on alternative fuel ideas!
Watch this, and in your own mind ';what would you say?';


http://youtube.com/watch?v=3db2IMqx4j0





Alternative's will come but it will be another 15-20 years to come up with a mainstream fix, ethanol.......? Electric.........?


Nitrogen Fuel cell........?
Why not ask their screwball buddies in Congress. Pssst!!! They're called Democrats.


By the way, have you noticed how gas prices have gone through the roof since Democrats took control of Congress in 2007?
Okay, because you paying less to fill your car up is the most important thing in the world. If you need it explained you're already a lost cause.
Silly, it's not OUR country, it's their country.





Facts Ruin Cons got ';facts'; from same environmental site from group fighting drilling. What a joke. More supply equals same high price, sources please!!!!!
I think you've burned up enough buffalo on your 3rd trip to the mall. Hands off Alaska. Maybe the future will have a better use for it than a drive through drug store.
Because it might mess up the caribou's mating habits. A polar bear might eat a oily snowball... These freaks are complete idiots but they have the dem party in their back pocket....
I prefer alternative fuel sources vs more of the same. GOP supporters rarely think long term. It is always about the moment with them.
Something about elk or owls or something like that..
Why won't those woodpeckers stop drilling in your head?
Yeah let's blame them for the price of gas!
the oil we have is in reserve for the military


w/o it our country is defensless
Drilling here will not bring the price down.
Because we enjoy oxygen. You should try some.

concealer

Will the enviros ever let us drill our oil, instead of having to go hat in hand to the Saudis?

Obviously it's a terrible idea to rely on them for anything!!!Will the enviros ever let us drill our oil, instead of having to go hat in hand to the Saudis?
no they want to bring america to her knees at all cost. they have no compassion for anything but themselves. they scream the loudest and liberal dems cave into them because they are needed to keep them in office. some high muckidy muck was on fox news and he stated that eco freaks won't rest till congress and the senate put a stop to taking all carbon from the ground meaning coal and oil. no nuclear power plants i guess they want us to go back to horeses and candles and sod homes. mr doodlesWill the enviros ever let us drill our oil, instead of having to go hat in hand to the Saudis?
No, they will not let us drill for oil in Alaska because it is not worth it.





Even if we drilled in Alaska, it would take 10 years to be fully operational. This means many more years of giving money to the Arabian Peninsula. That is a bad idea.





Even if we drilled in Alaska, we would still need to depend on OPEC for a lot of oil. Bad Idea.





Our country needs to invest in a new alternative energy source that takes us completely off oil. This cannot be achieved for many years, but we need to start investing now. The rewards would be greater then drilling in Alaska.





Conservatives should stop looking at oil and start looking at the future. If drilling in ANWR is such a good idea, show me some sources that say so.
Even if we did drill, the US oil reserves are approximately 5% of Saudia Arabia's, and not nearly enough to meet our needs.





Canada actually has the second largest ';known oil reserves'; in the world, but they are in the form of ';oil sands'; - not light sweet crude. Oil sands only became economically viable to refine when oil hit $40/barrel, so Canada's production is increasing monthly.





Bottom line: The US doesn't have significant oil reserves, so as long as we are dependent on oil we will be dependent on foreign suppliers. Drilling in the artic is a short-term solution that will benefit Bush's oil buddies, but not solve the US's long-term energy needs.
If they truly were that zealous about protecting the environment, why haven't they done anything more about the drilling run amok in western Colorado? They only protect areas that fit in their sense of self righteousness where they believe they can garner the support of typically disinterested people to help influence governmental action. If they really cared about the situation, they'd find a more sane approach to the problem that would permit at least some level of access to our own resources. There really needs to be greater attention to alternative fuel possibilities. Wind and solar aren't likely to make your transportation get you where you need to be. Tying the hands of the American public and forcing us to send all of our money overseas for middle eastern oil is hardly the tack they should be taking if they want legitimate respect in the public arena.
As usual congress is part of the problem and not part of the solution.





Remember Clinton vetoed this bill. Hmmm. A million barrels of oil a day.





Enough natural gas to heat every home in the US for 100 years.
Not while they commute to work in taxpayer subsidized mass transit and return home to email their Congressmen against opening up the east and west coasts to offshore drilling.
I hate that Bush did that. Its below the office. I think those OPEC nation have us where they want us. Its all congresses fault, and doing NOTHING!
This is what we call milking the cow at midnight in another barn!

No oil spills after Katrina on Gulf Oil rigs. Does that mean drilling technologies are safer now?

Elmo, you are so wrong, new rigs are being built all the time. No new refineries have been built since the 70s. And to answer the original question, yes the drilling technology is much safer now. More oil leaks out of the bottom of the ocean floor than leaks from drilling rigs. They have what are called 'zero discharge' technologies, nothing (no oil or any of the chemicals used in the drilling process) gets into the water.No oil spills after Katrina on Gulf Oil rigs. Does that mean drilling technologies are safer now?
Your information is from what source? Yes, there were oil spillssss after Katrina, see below. Also, to avoid passing on fabrication you should 2nd, 3rd or even 4th check you sources and information. This way you can be sure you are educated and not passing on inaccuracies...





Your information that there was not oil spills because of the hurrican is false. Very often the information given through news media is biased and this sounds like you got fabrication! Right away I found honest reporting in a conservate magazine called 'Business Today- online' exerpt to follow:


';Oil prices hit $70.80 a barrel yesterday after Katrina forced the shutdown of nearly all the region鈥檚 oil production, more than 80 per cent of gas operations and forced eight refineries along the coast to shut.





The US Coast Guard said it received early reports of oil platforms and rigs adrift in the storm鈥檚 wake. Shell said that two of its oil drilling rigs under contract were adrift.





An oil drilling platform broke free of its mooring in Mobile Bay, Alabama, and slammed into a bridge due to the high winds.





Hurricane Ivan, wiped out a total of around 45 million barrels of US oil output over six months.'; The byproduct of that is OIL SPILLAGE. and Bush wants new drilling off Florida, meterologists (J.Hansen) are finding there is and will be an increase in the intensity and duration of these storms, in part, because of global climate change.





May 2006, the U.S. Minerals Management Service published their offshore damage assessment: 113 platforms totally destroyed, and - more importantly - 457 pipelines damaged, 101 of those major lines with 10'; or larger diameter. At least 741,000 gallons were spilled from 124 reported sources (the Coast Guard calls anything over 100,000 gallons a ';major'; spill). ';





MMS report to follow:


';Wells and platforms were shut down before the storm, so leakage from those facilities was minimal. Pipelines were shut down too. But what the officials failed to mention is they don't require industry to ';purge'; pipelines before a severe storm - so they were probably still loaded with oil, gas or liquid gas condensate. Any section of pipeline that was breached leaked all of that product into the Gulf within hours of the storm. That's what we think accounts for the widespread slicks seen on the imagery from September 1 and 2, covering hundreds of square miles and obviously emanating from many points of origin. These slicks dispersed after several days of high winds offshore, as shown by our followup imagery taken on September 12, but a few problems remained as evidenced by ongoing leaks from wrecked platforms. ';








This report from MMS details the pipeline damage that occurred.








OIL DRILLING IS NOT SAFE.





McCain, Bush, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich are pushing hard to open our national coastlines to oil drilling. In fact, Newt Gingrich has put together a petition like this that more than 750,000 people have signed! They鈥檙e using high gas prices and economic concerns to help their friends in the oil industry make even more money.





But here鈥檚 the real truth behind drilling offshore:





-- Seismic testing to locate oil creates decibel levels of 260 鈥?twice as loud as an ambulance 鈥?underwater. Exposure to these levels of noise underwater can cause disorientation, brain hemorrhaging, or even beaching for whales and dolphins.





-- Offshore drilling creates an increased risk of oil spills close to our beaches and coastlines.





--The need to address global warming means it is time to invest in renewable energy sources. Drilling for oil in dangerous locations will take years to reach the market and will only serve to increase global warming impacts when it does.





Tell John McCain that if he wants to stop global warming, he needs to stop helping the big oil companies and start making real change.





Ultimatly by drilling we have small short term gains for high long term costs. There is immense pollution to water and air done by drilling. And even if the drilling starts we will see NO decrease in fuel costs. The oil companies will be the beneficiaries because they will have lower costs per barrell, but will not pass on the saving. The gas crises of the 70's showed us that increase profit or supply does not translate into less cost for the consumer.No oil spills after Katrina on Gulf Oil rigs. Does that mean drilling technologies are safer now?
We build new oil rigs all the time and drilling platforms are only part of the solution it is also the extraction methods that have improved,more oil seeps naturally from the ocean floor in one year than we have spilled from an off shore platform in the history of U.S. deep sea drilling.
we haven't built any new oil rigs since the 70's how did we make them safer? it's like wine it gets better with age? haha


edit


really well i did not know that coolhand, i'll admit i was wrong then, surprising that liberals admit they are wrong?


i found something interesting though, http://www.wtrg.com/rotaryrigs.html


why have more offshore oil rigs closed down than opened up this year from last?
Sure it is...I know the far left wants to say it is not because they don't like oil. The want us all to ride bikes and drive electric cars.
yes. early spills were caused by cracks underseas





hugs!
Yes, MUCH safer.
Yes. Don't tell the Liberals though.
Sure.

If you had to choose one, would you rather drill for oil in Alaska, or send troops to war in Iraq?

I know there are other solutions, just if you had to pick one. Personally, I think we have more involved animal rights groups to protect the Alaskan animals than we do have people who would tend to the young men and women fighting.





P. S., I am a very staunch supporter of animals and the environment, and hate war at the same time.If you had to choose one, would you rather drill for oil in Alaska, or send troops to war in Iraq?
Alaska. You know, you're for the environment and that's great. When people oppose drilling in Alaska, they often show the most picturesque scenery in their opposition. Truth be told, the places where the oil is abundant is in the most barren looking spots in the entire state. Not only that, if we used our own oil and didn't buy from the Arab people, we wouldn't be giving our hard earned money to the types that sponsor terrorism. No terrorism support, less terrorism.





I say we drill our own oil, and put part of the profits into conservation and part into developing alternative fuels.If you had to choose one, would you rather drill for oil in Alaska, or send troops to war in Iraq?
We need to drill oil. We can move the animals to Canada until everything is bult then move them back.
I guess since the 2 aren't related, we're not suppossed to be in Iraq for oil, I would probably choose Alaska, but............


if I was convinced that there was a danger to our country in Iraq


or if I felt innocent people were being slaughtered by the thousands (like they were in Iraq in the early 90's) I would vote for soldiers in Iraq.


Our gas prices possibly lowering by having a new oil source wouldn't be worth ignoring the human suffering.
I would prefer to go cold and walk where I need to if it meant that millions of Iraqi children had a chance at a peaceful future.
Although drilling in Alaska might alleviate our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, it would not stop the spread of Islamo-fascism. So we would have to fight anyway, unless we decide to surrender to them even at home.
Neither.


We (well, someone does) have the technology to eliminate most of the need for petroleum fuels.


Nicola Tesla developed devices that could derive electricity from the air or the ground. Unfortunately, he didn't do a good job of publicizing his findings. After he died, the CIA scooped up his stuff and they have control of the best technology, and they aren't about to share it with us...


Since we are held hostage to the oil companies, we are forced to use mostly petrol-based fuels and the U.S. troops are in Iraq to ensure that global corporations have a handle on the oil, there.
Alaska
This question is like asking: ';Which is better - an apple or a screwdriver?';





Drilling for oil in Alaska and the war in Iraq have nothing to do with each other.
They have nothing to do with each other.





I would do both.





We need oil and the Iraqi people need to be freed from violence.





Good question...you get a star from me!
only drilling is our profession
That's a no-brainer. Everyone will choose Alaska. No matter how much people like animals, no one should ever choose it over human life. Unlike the current administration...
I think the best thing is to educate yourself so you know what is really going on in the world.
Alaska
I am with you, but why post the question??
How about we stop being ridiculous and invest in some renewable energy vehicles.





www.myersmotors.com/





Too expensive for most people right now but it's already available and suits the needs of most people for day-to-day activities.





Drilling in Alaska for oil isn't any better of an option then sending troops to Iraq. All it does it change the location of the problem. Developing better electric cars solves the problem.

The liberals who have refused to let the US drill our own oil, are they traitors?

If you peel away the spin and the lies, at the end of the day, liberals practice civil disobedience when they are out of power, they actively harm the USA, to create problems that can be politicized, to gain political advantage.





Do liberals who claim they love the environment, sincerely want the US to be dependant on foreign oil, to undermine our economy?





Are these liberals traitors?The liberals who have refused to let the US drill our own oil, are they traitors?
No


Those Americans that allow any type of liberal fascism is a traitorsThe liberals who have refused to let the US drill our own oil, are they traitors?
ONE PIECE OF LEGISLATION IS WHY OIL IS THROUGH THE ROOF


Lay, DeLay, Gramm, Gramm %26amp; Clinton





PART ONE


http://www.star-telegram.com/104/story/6…





PART TWO


http://www.star-telegram.com/ed_wallace/…





Republicans offer the same old tired slogans that they have touted throughout the Bush years and that haven’t done anything to combat the increase in gas prices





- More Drilling: Domestic drilling has not led to lower prices. Since 2000, drilling has increased dramatically – climbing about 66 percent– while gas prices continue to increase. and gas companies have shown that they cannot keep pace with the rate of drilling permits that the federal government is handing out – over the past 4 years they have received and are sitting on nearly 10,000 permits that they aren’t using to increase domestic production. Since 1999, drilling permits for oil and gas development on public lands increased more than 361 percent.





- OCS: The vast majority of federal oil and gas resources located on the OCS are already open for development - of all the oil and gas believed to exist on the OCS, nearly 80% of oil and 82% of natural gas is located in areas already open for leasing. In 2006, the federal government opened 8.3 million new acres in the Gulf of Mexico to drilling, yet gasoline prices have increased by $1.69 per gallon. Only 10.5 million of the 44 million leased offshore acres are actually producing oil or gas.





- Open ANWR: EIA estimates that if we open ANWR today, twenty years down the road, at peak production, gas prices would be lowered at the maximum by $1.44 per barrel, which translates to only a few cents a gallon. Increased conservation and the use of alternative technologies in the last three years have cut the projected need for imported oil between now and 2050 by more than 100 billion barrels (EIA) – ten times more benefit than what we might be able to get a decade from now from ANWR.





- More Refineries: We have excess refining capacity. Last week, our refineries were running at 89% capacity – well below the 95-98% capacity use rates we’ve seen this time of year for the last decade. Republicans argue that environmental regulations are preventing new refineries from being built in the U.S. From 1975 to 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received only one permit request for a new refinery, which was approved. In addition, oil companies are regularly applying for – and receiving – permits to modify and expand their existing refineries.





Republicans and Democrats have a fundamentally different approach to tackling high gas prices. Democrats are being aggressive today to lower prices and reduce dependence on foreign oil while thinking ahead to tomorrow





- Working to Address Rising Gas Prices





- Enacted legislation to increase oil supply by temporarily suspending the fill of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the nation’s crude oil stockpile. (H.R. 6022)





- Gave the FTC new authority to crack down on those manipulating wholesale energy markets to keep prices high in the Energy Independence and Security Act (H.R. 6)





- Approved the Gas Price Relief for Consumers Act (H.R. 6074) to hold the OPEC monopoly accountable for price fixing that flouts the free market and artificially drives up the cost of crude oil.





- Passed the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act (H.R. 1252) to investigate price gouging by retailers who may be using the cover of high prices to unfairly inflate their rates even further.





- Investing in a Sustainable, Energy Independent America





- Enacted the landmark Energy Independence and Security Act (H.R. 6) that raised vehicle fuel efficiency for the first time in 32 years and increased the renewable fuels standard.





- Passed the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Act (H.R. 5351) to end unnecessary subsidies to oil companies making record profits and invest in clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency.





- Approved the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act (H.R. 6049) to renew and expand tax incentives for renewable energy.





- Passed the Food and Energy Security Act (H.R. 2419) that promotes the development of biofuels, including those from non-corn sources.





If costs go up then of course prices go up. But why then would profits go up? Shouldn’t it be a wash? YEP





But here’s another wrinkle…the cost for Middle East oil producers hasn’t gone up!





FACT





Oil executives and speculators are getting rich on the backs of American consumers. Indeed, on average, it costs a company such as ExxonMobil about $20 to extract a barrel of oil, which in turn is sold for more than $115 a barrel. Refiner profit margins have also been soaring at vertically integrated oil companies, which helps explain how the largest five oil companies in America have posted more than $550 billion in profits since 2001


http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release…





John McCain doesn’t think it’s “too important” when and if our troops ever come home. Just as long as they stop getting themselves killed over there!





Iraq and Iran have met and agree the Number One impediment to progress there is the presence of US Troops. Whose out of touch now Grandpa?





New polling shows Obama beating McCain in the General Election, but remember it’s just a snapshot in time. We have work to do. Right wing Talk Shows are smearing Obama everyday with lies and even allegations of “terrorist hand signals”. Sheesh. Desperate men do desperate things. Obama has set up a website for you to report any smears and to fact check the ones that are already out there.


http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/f…





And I’ve included a little IQ test for you today. Test your Candidate IQ!





Grandpa


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio…





Obama


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/polit…








HOMEWORK





Head ot the FTC was an Exxon Mobil lawyer until 2005


http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/09/bush-…





Currently the Head of the FTC is William E. Kovacic who has done nothing with the new authority Congress gave him in 2007


http://www.examiner.com/p-154031~Pelosi_…





DUMB JOHN MCCAIN QUOTES


http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/johnm…





GRANDPA MCCAIN





When the troops come home “is not too important”


http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?u…





Here’s Senator John Kerry’s response AND Senator John Thune’s attempt at damage control


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/…





IRAQ AND IRAN TALK





THE NUMBER ONE PROBLEM IS THE PRESENCE OF AMERICAN TROOPS


http://www.startribune.com/templates/Pri…





Americans ask “IS THERE PROGRESS IN IRAQ?” Answer - No one knows


http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0610/p03s0…





Obama widens lead against John McCain


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12132204…





Sen. Obama leads among independent voters, 41% to 36%.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/…





Most women however do not know that Granpa’s position on ROE v WADE is to ABOLISH it completely.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/…





Senator Obama has a new website to fight the smears and rumours that are spread about him and his wife Michelle. If you see something SAY something.


http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/f…





http://www.time.com/time/politics/articl…

Why does McCain want to Drill for More Oil?

Obviously global warming and fuel emission goes hand in hand. If we keep using oil, won't the Earth climate be to drastic for us to live in? Isn't there already alternative fuel sources and can't we just invest in them so they'd be cheap for the public as a whole? Shouldn't we care more about how long we'll be able to survive with Global Warming?Why does McCain want to Drill for More Oil?
Drilling is a bridge to keep oil prices down now.





It buys us time.





Why does McCain want to Drill for More Oil?
Global warming is a serious issue. Getting to a point where we can rely on alternative fuels without bankrupting the government (oops, too late) is also important.





We consume 25% of the worlds oil and we only have 3% of the reserves. That is a problem. Over the next 20 years, we can turn that problem into an opportunity. This is a capitalist society (sorry if you are a socialist). We can MAKE MONEY developing alternative fuels.





We need to develop lots and lots of NUCLEAR. But we also need to develop and enhance thermal heat for homes (did you know this is already economically viable, yet only.005% of homes have it), wind, tidal, et.c (except forget solar...it doesn't work).





In the short-run we also need to drill. Every barrell we can find is $70-130 that does not go to a terrorist.
You are correct. Drilling for more oil will not resolve our energy crisis nor will it enhance our ability to control climate change. Despite the fact that drilling will not produce results for another decade or so, the U.S. uses 25% of the world's oil while we only maintain 3% of its resources.
so the bush cronies can continue to make money.

concealer

When Mother Nature is drilled for oil and shoots out a gusher is that her having an orgasm?

DRAGON 2012


';Great fortune for U.S.';When Mother Nature is drilled for oil and shoots out a gusher is that her having an orgasm?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ah, Dragon...you crack me UP!

What is the REAL reason the Democrats refuse to let us drill for our own oil?

Seriously folks, I can usually penetrate the Democrat ';smokescreen'; and see through to their political motivations, but this time I will have to admit that they've got me stumped. Set aside their rhetoric and obfuscation (if you can), and please tell me what their actual, ';hidden,'; deep-seated reasons for opposing the idea of allowing us to drill in our own oil reserves are. This one's really beyond me, so thanks in advance for your help.What is the REAL reason the Democrats refuse to let us drill for our own oil?
The DEEP pockets of Big Envronmentalism have them doing their bidding.





If people don't think the environmentalists are a BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY then they are fooling themselves.What is the REAL reason the Democrats refuse to let us drill for our own oil?
Seriously, when was the last time you drilled for oil?





Oil companies, on the other hand, have been leased 10s of millions of acres of public lands for 3 dollars per acre per year (what a deal, huh? You can't beat that rent with a stick) rich in oil deposits that they haven't bothered to drill yet.





If I were you, I'd write those mean, old, nasty, non-drilling oil companies a nasty letter.





It doesn't bother me that much, however, because the price of oil doesn't have a thing to do with them not drilling those bargain-priced leases.





But if I thought not drilling was the problem (like you do), then I'd definitely send them nasty letters.
The oil isn't ';ours'; as we have NOT nationalized fossil fuel reserves.





If you want foreign companies (like Shell or BP) or even US companies to drill, be prepared for several things:





first, THEY must decide it is economically feasible (and they haven't tapped into the leases they currently bought and own),





Further, there is little reason to think they will not sell this oil to the highest bidder as they have always done.





Further, any drop of oil recovered is 10 years away, and by that time, we had better be moving towards alternatives...





LAstly, US reserves, are, in my opinion, best left unexploited for strategic reasons.
They don't believe that National Wildlife Preserves should be opened up for exploitation by private oil companies. There are many other places the oil companies have been allowed to drill but aren't. This is all a ploy to destroy natural habitats that had been set aside for protection, just to let a few rich people get even richer.
haven't you researched the facts that even if we started drilling right now it would take about 5 years to show any benefits, then after that their is only 2 .1/2 years of oil left in the U.S~!!!





and then who pays for the extra oil rigs and wages and extra equipment and startup costs~??!!!





we do~!!!.....it will actually RAISE prices if you crunch the numbers and do the research~!!!





seriously, what is it that you people don't get~??!!!
The idea behind their refusal is this: it would create environmental damage, there is not enough oil to significantly drop prices anyway, and drilling now will not hold off the inevitable - to sum up the cost does not equal the payoff.





I'm not agreeing or disagreeing at this point, but those are the reasons.
I think they are just taking a contrary viewpoint.





Our neighbors have increased oil production in the past decade and our production has declined. You'd think they would want to quit being associated with the high price of gas but they seem to enjoy that honor.





It is just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing as far as I can see. You know it's good to let them get the majority in both houses every once in a while to remind us of how incompetent they really are.





fs
First of all do you honestly think we can just go drill tomorrow and have oil by the next day? It's going to take years for us to even benefit from it..Democrats are more so about saving energy saving oil, coming up with better solutions for time like this when where spending $4+ on gasoline...maybe something like 100 mpg cars...just a better way...oil isn't going to last us for ever, and as our dollar becomes weaker won't always be able to get so much from other countries...On top of that global warming is real, I don't know if you look at TIME or National Geographic but ice berg's are melting animals will become extinct..yeah it will take many years but were trying to save our planet for future generations
As far as off-shore drilling it is because we need the oceans and drilling will destroy them.





The only real answer to the energy crisis we are currently experiencing is to move away from oil and develop alternative energy sources and improve our public transit systems. To really work on these two areas would create jobs and improve our economy as well as our ecology.





As an Obama supporter, I must say, I am glad that McCain is talking about increasing Nuclear energy. I commend him for that.
They don't promote capitalism, they don't promote or encourage self sufficiency in anything they do, so what's the problem with being reliant on the middle east for oil?





They want everyone to rely on the gov't for social issues, so why not oil too!?!





We'll just talk with the middle east and have a pleasant conversation regarding the price of oil.
Let's see. The laws were originally passed by George H. W. Bush and the Republican controlled congress did nothing to even try to repeal them for 6 years. You might want to ask some of the Republican legislators.





Also, you could ask the oil companies why they haven't started drilling in all of areas they have had government leases on for decades.
Very simple...every time the Republicans try to pass legislation to drill, they tack on a provision to open up ANWAR. That is the deal breaker.





If they would simply put forth a bill WITHOUT ANWAR, they would probably get it passed.





Oddly enough McCain is talking sense on this subject, but people have gotten so used to ignoring him, he isn't getting much traction.
Seriously, my friend, we have over 80 million acres of unexplored land and sea leased for discovery, but the oil co. isn't drilling there, because they want the easy stuff first, even though in the Anwar alone there is only enough, on the high guess, to last us about, oh.......4 MONTHS!!!


Drill the leased land first, then we'll talk about the rest....BUT do the leased land and seas.....FIRST!!!!


I thank you for your attention.
Because they actually ENJOY seeing Americans suffer. For the last several years, they've needed reasons to hate the white house administration... I swear, they jump up and down when financial experts predict a recession/depression in our future. They will be able to blame Republicans for that for YEARS!
not true, you are VERY misinformed





the oil companies are NOT even using all the land they have leased at this time


IF they did that would be 6x the amount of oil ANWAR would supply





so... why don't we just drill in those places 1st ?


lots of oil than can be drilled right now !! (but isn't)
The environmental groups that oppose drilling are all funded by foundations(Ford, Rockefeller, etc). The foundations have the same directorship as the banks and oil companies. A high oil price creates demand for the dollar and stabilizes the banking system.
They don't want problems to get resolved as right now enough people blame Bush for it. Just like they where kicking and screaming to end the Troop Surge before it had barely begun because they where afraid it would work.





Politics before country.
Who wants to drill off shore anyway. I just saw on the news that wild catters are drilling on land. Now that oil is $135 barrel its worth the investment to drill again. Private citizens drilling for oil. I love it!
Beacause it not a supply and demand issue. It has to do with the value of our dollar. Prices are going up everywhere, not just with gas and oil. Look around you, the dollar is causing prices to go up.
It's easy, we use 18 million barrel a day and all the oil drilled in the entire USA would get us maybe 1 Million. For that little bit, which would have no significant impact, we would destroy our last bit of nature.
I'm a republican and i think its a bad idea to drill for it right now.





Save it for a time when it is truly critical.
because the republicans are for it, Democrats just disagree to disagree, there is no teamwork, no WORK FOR AMERICA in congress
There is no hidden agenda. We're not republicans.





It REALLY won't bring down prices. It WILL just give more money to the oil companies. It REALLY won't solve the underlying causes of the oil supply /cost problem.
They painted themselves in a corner with complete support on environmentalists and the man made global warming crowd. If they ';give in'; and allow big oil to drill their base will go nuts.
I think the reason for them upholding the decisions of Reagan and Bush Sr. are about ecology/environment.
Environmental reasons. It seems obvious to me.
Then we can't whine about the Republicans and blame them for everything. That's no fun!
It is all about tourism and fishy's
and who put thoses restrictions into place


George Bush SR.


and Ronald Reagan
They are owned by the environMENTAL lobby, and they want us to suffer !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Maybe because in 10 years when that oil is ready it'll be China and India buying it all up, not us?

If us conservatives knew that any oil drilled in Anwar Province has to go on the world market, would we be so?

willing to sacrifice our last wildlife refuge?If us conservatives knew that any oil drilled in Anwar Province has to go on the world market, would we be so?
Oil is 98% higher this year than last, there has not been a 98% increase in demand.


Oil drilled anywhere would go on the world market, the only way we would get a break is if we nationalized oil or at least had an arm of government involved with its production.


But we don't, we have a free economy, at least if you can afford it.


All our country does is sell leases on government land, we don't get to tell an independent company to cut us a break.


Any economist will tell you that oil companies aren't going to spend money drilling just to lower the price.


But really, they don't care about wilderness, they only care about commerce. If you can find some way to package wilderness tours with fancy bathroom spas and outlet malls they may feel differently, but a unique and fragile ecology has them yelling about tree huggers.If us conservatives knew that any oil drilled in Anwar Province has to go on the world market, would we be so?
1. There would be *zero* sacrifice of the ';Wildlife Refuge'; in ANWR if we drill for Oil there.


2. Even *if* *ALL* the oil from ANWR were to go into the ';World Market'; (not a likely event) it would *STILL* be better for our economy because it would help the balance of trade


3. There is no such thing as the ';Anwar Province';... there is no such place... it doesn't exist.... so before you try to be snide with a question, at least be informed about the subject instead of being a mindless parrot of the Eco-Freaks...
You are joking right?





ANWR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge) is not a province, it is not a political subdivision of any kind. AN-BAR province is in Iraq and we have nothing to say as to whether oil is drilled there.





Even an announcement of oil drilling in ANWR would drop the price of oil 20-30%. This would trigger greater output by OPEC in order to keep their revenue up and this would trigger futher drops in prices even before one drop of oil was drilled in ANWR. Why? Because OPEC would see they have reached the ceiling and that other countries are getting serious about horning in on their action. They would increase production to cause lower world market prices and make drilling in ANWR (an expensive proposition, anyway) much less attractive. The best protection for the wildlife of ANWR would be to open the area for oil production! It is ONLY the current high price of oil that even makes drilling there attractive. Announce a ';new supply'; of oil and the price will drop below the level needed to make drilling in ANWR profitable and it will never be done.





The liberal contention it would not make a difference for 10 years is pure balderdash and completely ignores simple economics. If you have a LOWES store in your town and HOME DEPOT puts up a ';coming Soon'; sign on another corner...see if Lowe's doesn;t have big sales, right away!





It also assumes that a country that can produce and deploy an atomic weapon from scratch in 3 years, or send a man to the moon and back in 8 years would somehow take TEN years to pump oil, something we do every day of the week for over a century!!!!!!!! Please do not EVEN insult my intelligence like that. I lived in oil country in West Texas all my life (until age 34) and it takes LESS THAN 6 months from signing mineral lease agreements to get the first check in hand for oil royalties! OPEC knows this even if the liberals can't buy a clue.





ANWR is NOT our last NWR, there are hundreds of them, there is one less than 5 miles from my home.





Oil put on the ';world market'; where ALL oil is sold, would have the same effect as any other oil on the market...lower prices! When supply is increased, price drops. Works every time it is tried.
YES! Cuz that would be the point.


Add to the supply... bring down the price. That is simple economics... More supply + same demand = lower price.





And the best part... The very INTENTION to drill would cause speculators to ';speculate'; about more supply... and even the possibility of future supply would bring down the price NOW!





Not to mention that is a new source of revenue for the federal government (all the taxes they would charge whoever is drilling and selling the oil) - WITHOUT having to raise taxes!
ANWAR consists of 19 million acres I don't see how drilling on the northern most shelf in an area the size of an airport will hurt anything.. and yes anybody which understands commodities knows it will end up on the world market.. and anyone who understands the very most basic principles of supply and demand understand the price of gas will go down.. We sacrifice Nothing..


http://www.anwr.org/
Get the facts straight about Anwar. The area they want to drill in Anwar is not the plush beautiful wilderness that you see in pictures. It is a baron waste land, so we will not be sacrificing our last wildlife refuge, and that's a fact.
If Rush Limbaugh and any other Conservative pundit said we should not drill in AnWar, you'd better believe that every Conservative would be against it.





By that same token, every Liberal would be for it.
Last wildlife refuge? Where do you get your info? Buy a map!





The total footprint of a drilling rig would be minuscule compared to the entire size. It would hardly be a sacrifice, get real.
I'd be willing to sacrifice 2% of it, and know that the other 98% would still make a fine refuge.





besides, you libs keep telling us to cut the deficit.
Of course its going on the world market...


Those on the right insist the high oil prices is due to world supply and demand, then don't think that this Alaskan oil would end up the same place...all over the world
Wow, here's a difficult concept for you and your fellow democrats, if you INCREASE supply to the point where it outpaces DEMAND then COST goes DOWN.
Have you seen the location of ANWAR? THERE'S ******* NOTHING OUT THERE...yes it would go to the open market...but its better than sitting on your *** saying we have to find alternate fuel sources...

Do you think building new oil refineries and drilling for the 500 year supply of oil in our own country makes?

sense? I am all for a clean environment and the technology today is geared toward protecting the environment. I would put a well in my back yard if I could. We need to push congress to relax the regulations on building refineries and drilling for our own oil.Do you think building new oil refineries and drilling for the 500 year supply of oil in our own country makes?
I totally agree with you. However we have some blatant hypocrites in the Congress, who rather would destroy the US than show some common sense.Do you think building new oil refineries and drilling for the 500 year supply of oil in our own country makes?
...The U.S. could become ';energy independent'; ....';If'; our Congress would allow the Oil company's to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico and the NE corner of Alaska... sadly the ';beach front millionaires'; who manipulate the Government keep us dependent upon the ';oil producing'; Nations of the Middle East... U.S. corporate ingenuity could have us completely ';energy independent'; in a few years ';If'; they had the ';cuffs'; taken off and allowed good'ol Americans to take care of America... so...until that change happens, fasten your seat-belt and get ready to watch oil prices to go up to $10.00 per gallon in the next few years and watch ';our'; economy grind to a halt as American truckers go out of business because of the ';beach front millionaires';...
Lack of facts make your arguement invalid. Even if we started drilling here, we only have about a 100 day amount of oil here. The oil is mostly found in the Middle East. A better idea is to reduce demand. The price will follow.
Yeah, build more refineries while all the Oil Corporations are only operating at a 80% capacity





do the math!!
Agreed, but they wouldn't even have to build new refineries, just expand the existing refineries.
There aren't as many places in the U.S. where oil is available as you might think.





And the oil that IS available is exported.
refining will not produce oil


using less oil is the answer , tax heavily the persons with BMI( Body Mass Index) of more than 25 , oil price swill come down
build refineries ,drill for oil ,and use the royalties to research alternative fuel and lower our taxes
From what i hear is that alaska has quite alot of oil..if we can just tap into it, but the nerd- heads of congress wont allow it.
NO, no sense at all, unless you have stock like the wealthy and rich.
I love the thrill of the drill. Screw them polar bears!
You are the first person I've heard assert that we have a 500-year supply of oil within the US.





I favor moving towards a mixed energy supply using biodiesel, photovoltaic/hydrogen fuel cell, hydroelectric, wind, tidal, and perhaps even nuclear. The technology exists right now to implement any or all of these, on a scale from household- to neighborhood, to national levels.





The argument that oil is cheaper isn't going to hold water for much longer.

Why has most oil and gas drilling stopped?

They claimed mass shortages and lack of supply all the way up to $4.00 per gallon for gasoline and more for diesel.Then seemingly overnight they have too much surplus and prices drop to record lows, and natural gas did same thing. these things are not transferred by e-mail they are trucked, shipped , or pipe-lined and the inventory simply can't change that quickly.I was and have been employed in the oil and gas industry most of my life (on rigs), am presently unemployed as are most people i know and worked with, they laid us off because their profits dropped below insane.I believe it all to be a huge scam and think they have bled our country dry. I thought so before I lost my own job as well, They need investigated..all the way up to Bush and Cheney, in my opinion. Your thoughts?Why has most oil and gas drilling stopped?
ya, its hard to not think this, seeing as how the former president is deep in the oil biz.Why has most oil and gas drilling stopped?
Current low price for oil
They ran out of gas at the wells?

When Obama & McCain Are Against Drilling For The Oil We All Need,Bush Disagrees. NoWonder HeWon Again In 04?

Many hate or disapprove of Bush...But he has always has done what he thought was right for America...You don`t like that ?...Well...good for you...Remember this in the years ahead...BUSH WAS RIGHT.When Obama %26amp; McCain Are Against Drilling For The Oil We All Need,Bush Disagrees. NoWonder HeWon Again In 04?
Bush has been right about most things. I'll be sorry to see him go.When Obama %26amp; McCain Are Against Drilling For The Oil We All Need,Bush Disagrees. NoWonder HeWon Again In 04?
Get real. He is doing the same thing that he did all along: fooling the gullible with smoke and mirrors.





ANWR will take 10 years to begin production. Then it will produce about 100,000 barrels a day. We import 16 million barrels per day.





Even the Republican governor Schwarzenegger has enough sense not to allow oil rigs in San Francisco bay. Remember the tiny earthquakes in the 70s and the huge oil spills that resulted? What happens when the Big One hits? It's beyond stupid to drill for oil in an area where earthquakes are an everyday occurrence.





The other banned area is Hurricane Alley in the gulf. Think about it.


The actual area that is off limits there isn't all that big. Oil companies have leases for hundreds of fields in the area. The only spots off-limits are those so close to the shore that would cause massive damage to the East coast if a hurricane knocked them out. The oil companies aren't even using the leases that they have now. Even if we give them the oil rights to Hurricane Alley, it may be 20 years before they get around to using any of them. It's expensive drilling rigs in that area.





Even if we managed to drill all three areas, it wouldn't help much. 1/15 of 1% of the amount that we import every day. Starting 10 years from now.





It's important that we do become energy independent. As long as we depend on oil, we're at the mercy of the mid-east, Russia and Venezuela for our daily oil. We need to be concentrating on developing coal, shale oil, nuclear, solar, wind, corn, mulch, anything we can think of into energy, instead of putting blind faith in this pie-in-the-sky idea that only works for people who can't count.


Here's what the government's Energy Information Administration had to say about drilling:


http://www.cnbc.com/id/25371472
Bush could open up off-shore drilling with the stroke of a pen on an Executive Order. (His dad closed the door on it with one.) Why doesn't he? If it's so critical to national security, why isn't Bush acting today?
John McCain has changed his position on off shore drilling and drilling in ANWAR because the facts have changed.
As usual

concealer

If the democrat congress does not vote for a clean energy bill to drill for oil & gas will they lose in 08&09.?

I think they will lose the house %26amp;senate majority in the next election.If the democrat congress does not vote for a clean energy bill to drill for oil %26amp; gas will they lose in 08%26amp;09.?
Possibly on this issue but I don't think it will matter to the democrats. They're too busy trying to push everyone into putting windmills on the top of their cars in the next ten years to replace oil.

Who buys the oil after it has been drilled up by natural resource companies ?

after the oil is extracted from the ground where does it go?Who buys the oil after it has been drilled up by natural resource companies ?
It goes to the refineries (PDVSA, GAZPROM, etc) and then it usually goes to trading companies or entities that actually need the project. A lot of hedge funds are purchasing nowadays as well.Who buys the oil after it has been drilled up by natural resource companies ?
To the refineries, then to the gas stations.

Can Dems really say they are for the 'little' people when they will not allow for new drilling for oil?

I guess this means they really like people being poor so they can offer more handouts or am I wrong?Can Dems really say they are for the 'little' people when they will not allow for new drilling for oil?
They would rather confiscate oil company profits and invest in politically motivated technologies that may or may not one day be cost effective.





Sounds about right for the party of ';good intentions';..Can Dems really say they are for the 'little' people when they will not allow for new drilling for oil?
Can you tell me how allowing more drilling in public lands with benefit anyone right now? Even Bush admits it wouldn't help supply and demand for years. His father even supported not allowing that drilling. Oil companies already have 86 million acres offshore alotted for drilling and they haven't bothered to develope them. Even Iran says these prices are artifically blown up by the market. We need to stop blaming this on supply issues and stop the decline of the US dollar.
They will allow for drilling this is just crazy. There is millions and millions of land in the USA already approved to drill in, yet the President is focusing on off shore stuff, why can't he say, oil companies, drill were you already have permits?





He is making this purely political and you are eating it up.
Drilling for more oil will not lower the price on gas! You need to tax them, that will lower the prices because the cost is never passed on to the consumer. Simple democratic economics. No they aren't for the little people only thier money.





Only everybody else BUT America is allowed to drill off our shore.
Well they have good reason. It is our duty as the human race to preserve the enviorment and not completely destroy it, and drilling for more oil will ';NOT'; lower gas prices now. At most it will take 5 years to lower it a few cents. If we want to lower gas prices we need to invest in more renewable energy.
Good question,


McCain is looking into drilling for oil in our own country.Why should the most wonderful country in the world, be dependent on foreign oil ???.... COME ON PEOPLE.


For example...Look at the country Brazil.They are a poor country and even they are NOT depending on foreign oil.


My husband is from Brazil.It looks like they are smarter than we are.
Do you even know what you are talking about?





Do you know how many hundreds of barrels of oil are leaked into the ocean each month by each platform?





When you get educated then come back and we will have a discussion. Until then, leave the debate to those who know what they are talking about.
Gas in Mexico. $2.50 a gallon. A reduction in the need for oil vs. supply. Hmmmm. it sounds like speculators are making the millions driving up the per barrel prices. Drilling for more oil will only make others rich, and not solve the problem of the cost per barrel we Americans are stuck with.
I thought the EPA was not allowing for drilling?





Besides, how long will it take to extract oil from Alaska? 10 years?





Continue to post your rhetoric here, and all of us - both cons and libs - will laugh at you and your un-American stupidity.
Yes. The really little people. The future for our kids and there kids. So we drill and deplete More resources,displace more wildlife,destroy more of the planet and continue our viral existence on the Earth. Then what, Star trek is still sci fi so where will our children and there children live or we just to become extinct too.
Considering that there are BETTER and CHEAPER ways of solving the energy crisis than drilling for oil, I'd have to say yes. They are more for the ';little'; people than Republicans are. Time to get someone in office who can see past next week.
Yeah right, lets see them explain that to the single mom working overtime at Mcdonalds, or the family that has to drive to walmart to shop.





But hey as long as they vote for them, let them pay the price for that vote.
Yes. Telling people you're gonna drill for oil and it will only take TEN YEARS to see any benefit isn't very useful for current gas prices, is it?
Oil is like a crack addiction for America. So we need to find new things to help us and think about God's green earth and stop new pollution from happening.
new oil drilling will not change much. Maybe we'll save a few cent in 5-10 year...big whoop... We have to save using nuclear power, that's the answer
This is stupid, how is drilling for oil going to help in the short term? Who's watch did all this happen on? Blame the Right people
no they just wanna be in power
what is the alternative fuel?

Why do democrats oppose offshore drilling when it will lower the price of oil?

don't give me that the 1st George Bush opposed it, THIS IS NOW, I can't afford these high prices much longer we have to do something before WINTER or do you want to freeze millions of americansWhy do democrats oppose offshore drilling when it will lower the price of oil?
The real answer. The democrats will do anything to get President Bush and the Republicans out of control.





Case and Point:


Supply and demand doesn't apply b/s.


The demand is going up and opec has refused to increase supply for that demand. Speculators are speculating on oil prices 5 years out based upon current conditions. When President Bush signed the repeal of the presidential ban oil prices dropped $10.00 almost immediately.





Case 2


it is not profitable to drill oil in the US for less than $75 per barrel (approx). If congress would open ANWR or Offshore to drilling, OPEC and others would drop there price (by increasing supply) to bring the price of oil down below that $75 dollar mark. Just to keep companies from drilling here. This would happen in a very short time. At that point Oil drilling allowed, oil below $75 no drilling in US (Not profitable)





So this has to be about getting President Bush and the Republicans out of office.....Why do democrats oppose offshore drilling when it will lower the price of oil?
The problem is simple, its people that makes it complicated. Drilling for more oil to increase supply will lower prices. We've seen this in process many times, but people close their minds to it. Want proof? Why did the prices go up when the offshore oil rigs shut down when Hurricane Katrina was approaching? Why did it go up again when the same hurricane did damage to the oil refineries along the coast? Why did it go down when oil supplies were higher than analysts expected on Wall street yesterday? Why did it go down when the Alaskan oil pipeline was built in the 70's? Why does it go up or down at certain times of the year like the summer or the holidays?





Oil companies make about a dime a gallon in pure profit, government makes makes triple that in pure tax money off that same gallon. So why should money loving politicians want to drill for more oil and reduce ';their'; money?





Solution is simple, vote out the people who are against energy independence, Ted Kennedy prevented a wind farm from being built in his neighborhood because it where he takes his yacht is one example.
Arnold Schwartzenegger is a Republican, one of the biggest. HE opposes it as well.





So you see, a LOT of Americans oppose it and you haven't really explained this: oil companies have FAILED to drill on 65 million acres they ALREADY HAVE!





Why do republicans want to give away more federal land to companies that are TOO lazy to use what they HAVE?





Why should American families have to pay more for gas when EVIL oil companies REFUSE to use what they have been given??





Why does Exxon want to hold America hostage? Profits?
Off shore drilling does nothing for the price of gas. You will never see a reduction int eh preice of oil from offshore drilling. that oil will not hit the market for more than 10 years. Best to go ahead and drill in the proven reserves currently under lease. Big oil simply does not want to brinig more oil to market. I say to hell with the, revoke the leases they are not using, and bring in the Chinese to Drill
i'm a liberal republican and drilling sounds like a quick fix answer that is something i would expect out of a democrat. maybe people should learn to buy gas in the morning or night, slow down and follow the speed limit, air up those tires and change those spark plugs to high powered ones, or get rid of those old cars that only get nothing to the gallon. do that and the price of oil will come down, in the mean time prosecute those speculators and enforce the rule of law.
They put an alleged and purely hypothetical ';threat'; to wildlife ahead of human needs. Elk have legs and move around constantly and have been seen to actually enjoy the heat from the existing pipeline.As far as offshore drilling goes we might as well since China is slant drilling OUR oil and they are nowhere as well developed in their drilling practices as we are.
Do you have any idea what kind of damage we will cause to ANWR if we drill there? And for enough oil to last us 2 years, IF we are wise. And knowing our addiction to oil, it won't even last 1 year. Is it really worth it? EDUCATE yourself before you go spouting about Democrats not wanting lower gas prices. I want lower gas prices. I didn't want to have to quit my job and find a new one closer to home, so I know all about gas prices, sweetheart. You don't need to teach me anything.
The question isn't why are the dems opposes its why are the repubs for.


The oil realized from more off shore drilling is a drop in the bucket compared to our current demand.


The oil companies are only drilling on 20% of the leases they hold now.


Oil shale in the rockies has more oil than the Saudis


Canadian oil sands have more oil than the Saudis.


you tell me, why do we need more offshore rights?
If the Lislau Oil company found 100trillion barrels of oil offshore, would you dump it all on the market as fast as you could to lower the price for everyone else, or would you trickle it onto the market so YOUR oil company could benefit from $4 a gallon?





think about it
Because pelosi has royally screwed congress and says the Bush is afailure even though her approval rating is lower. The dumb ***** actualy cited his rating when hers is like a full 10 points lower at a whopping 18% for congress.. great job congress now get the hell outa the way.
(Like I said in a previous question)








Big Oil already has a lease on more than 68 million acres of Federal land to drill in. This land is said to hold more oil than ANWR and the coasts combined.








Why should I say yes, and then have them go **** up what beauty is left in America?





Let them use what they already have, God damnit!
I agree with President Bush-----we need to tap into our own resources NOW and begin innovating NOW-----this crisis (and it IS a crisis) could be brought under control if congress will do the right thing here.----so far a few have come out with really lame reasons why they oppose these measures----just listen to them------can't get much lamer than that.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE FAR LEFT HAS GOTTEN CONTROL OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. IT LOOKS LIKE THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO WIN BIG IN NOVEMBER WHICH MEANS THE FAR LEFT WILL GET CONTROL OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND WILL BE ABLE FOR THE FIRST TIME TO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. THEY WANT US TO STOP USING CARBON FUELS AND THEY DON'T CARE HOW IT WILL AFFECT THIS COUNTRY AS LONG AS THEY GET THEIR WAY.
Easy, because it will not lower the price of oil.





2/3rds of US oil for gasoline comes from Mexico and Canada, seems they charge the same per barrel as OPEC.





So exactly how will prices drop?


The oil companies will sell the ';new oil'; for less?








Huh?????
Offshore drilling won't lower the price of oil. The only thing that will is strengthening the US economy. The President and Congress don't seem to be interested in doing their jobs, so they wag the dog and argue about other things.
Basic supply and demand economics don't apply in this case. We are not witnessing high oil prices because there is a lack of supply. Much more of it revolves around the commodities market and a devalued dollar.
If one really thinks that off shore drilling will have an effect of oil prices this coming winter, then need to check and see how long it takes to actually get oil after they find it.


One doesn't drill an automatically hit OIL.
while youre freezing this winter i hope you dont blame the us pop for not supporting it. like drilling off shore is the magic answer to our current crisis. stop hittin the snooze button.
It won't lower the price, unfortunately.
Why risk it when the oil from it goes onto the world market and not for our own use? Crazy - isn't it?
Because of the 68 million acres the Oil Producers currently lease and have not drilled for oil yet.


Oil Producers won't produce even if they get permission to. They don't want an end to their huge profits from a ';shortage'; either now or the future. Our best hope is alternative sources of renewable energy. That scares the hell out of the Oil Producers. Watch prices drop from now until the election-they want to keep their Republicans friends in office.





By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent


Sat Jul 12, 6:49 PM ET





President Bush on Saturday tried to pin the blame on Congress for soaring energy prices and said lawmakers need to lift long-standing restrictions on drilling for oil in pristine lands and offshore tracts believed to hold huge reserves of fuel.


';It's time for members of Congress to address the pain that high gas prices are causing our citizens,'; the president said. ';Every extra dollar that American families spend because of high gas prices is one less dollar they can use to put food on the table or send a child to college. The American people deserve better.';


With gasoline prices above $4 a gallon, Bush and his Republican allies think Americans are less reluctant to ban drilling offshore and in an Alaska wildlife refuge that environmentalists have fought successfully for decades to protect. Nearly half the people surveyed by the Pew Research Center in late June said they now consider energy exploration and drilling more important than conservation, compared with a little over a third who felt that way only five months ago. The sharpest shift in attitude came among political liberals.


Democrats say they are for drilling, but argue that oil companies aren't going after the oil where they already have leases. So why open new, protected areas? they ask. Democrats say there are 68 million acres of federal land and waters where oil and gas companies hold leases, but aren't producing oil.


';Americans are fed up every time they go to fill up and they're right to demand action. But instead of a serious response, President Bush and his allies simply repeat the same old line more drilling,'; Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said in the Democrats' radio address.


';Democrats support more drilling,'; he said. ';In fact, what the president hasn't told you is that the oil companies are already sitting on 68 million acres of federal lands with the potential to nearly double U.S. oil production. That is why in the coming days congressional Democrats will vote on 'Use It or Lose It' legislation requiring the big oil companies to develop these resources or lose their leases to someone else who will.';


';But we know that drilling by itself will not solve the problem of high gas prices,'; Van Hollen said. ';We cannot drill our way to energy independence.';


He cited Democrats' calls to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, because it is full and ';America's rainy day is now.'; And he said the country must focus on new energy policies that focus on alternatives to oil.


Bush said that Democrats are at fault and that ';Americans are increasingly frustrated with Congress' failure to take action.


';One of the factors driving up high gas prices is that many of our oil deposits here in the United States have been put off-limits for exploration and production. Past efforts to meet the demand for oil by expanding domestic resources have been repeatedly rejected by Democrats in Congress.';


Bush repeated his call for Congress to lift the restrictions, including a ban on offshore drilling. A succession of presidents from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton to the current president have sided against drilling in these waters as has Congress each year for 27 years, seeking to protect beaches and coastal states' tourism economies.';





Bush, Democrats bicker over soaring energy prices - Yahoo! News





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_o…





TYPING IN CAPITALS WITH NOTHING BUT YOUR OPINION DOES NOT MAKE YOU CORRECT.


Democrats have only a slim majority. Not enough to prevent a Republican filibuster or override a veto. Guess who has been blocking legislation? Guess who has been vetoing?





Bush has vetoed over 17 bills in the past two years.





Bush's most recent vetoes:


Veto Date Bill Title Veto Code


2008-07-15 HR 6331 Medicare Bill V


2008-06-18 HR 6124 Second Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007 (Farm Bill) V


2008-05-21 HR 2419 Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007 (Farm Bill) V


2007-12-12 HR 3963 Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (CHIP) V


2007-10-03 HR 976 State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization V


2007-06-20 S 5 Stem Cell Research Act of 2007 V


2007-05-01 HR 1591 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill of 2007 with Iraq Withdrawal Timeline V





Note:


Medicare vetoed


Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act vetoed twice


Children's Health Insurance Program vetoed twice


Stem Cell Research vetoed


Iraq withdraw time line vetoed.





Who knew that the Federal Land Management placed a 2 year moritorium on Solar Energy Development on May 29, 2008? This was lifted on July 3, 2008 due to public pressure and outrage.


Lifts Moratorium on New Solar Projects





By DAN FROSCH


Published: July 3, 2008, New York Times


http://www. nytimes. com/2008/07/03/us/03solar. html?ref=us





DENVER — Under increasing public pressure over its decision to temporarily halt all new solar development on public land, the Bureau of Land Management said Wednesday that it was lifting the freeze, barely a month after it was put into effect.





The bureau had announced on May 29 that it was no longer processing new applications to build solar power plants on land it oversees in six Western states after federal officials said they needed first to study the environmental effects of solar energy, a process that would take two years.





But amid concerns from the solar power industry, members of Congress and the general public that the freeze would stymie solar development during a particularly critical time for energy policy, the bureau abruptly reconsidered.





“We heard the concerns expressed during the scoping period about waiting to consider new applications, and we are taking action,” the bureau’s director, James Caswell, said in a statement. “By continuing to accept and process new applications for solar energy projects, we will aggressively help meet growing interest in renewable energy sources, while ensuring environmental protections.”





In the meantime, the bureau will continue with its plans to conduct a sweeping study on the environmental impacts of large-scale solar development on public land in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah, said a spokeswoman, Celia Boddington.





Since 2005, the bureau has received more than 130 applications from private companies to build plants in those states, where large amounts of sun-scorched land make for prime solar real estate. Those proposals cover more than a million acres and have the potential to power 20 million homes.





The bureau will process all of the applications it received before the freeze, and now, as a result of Wednesday’s decision, will continue to accept new ones, studying the environmental effects of each proposed plant individually, Ms. Boddington said.





Solar energy advocates, who had lobbied against the freeze at public meetings that are being held by the bureau throughout the West, were pleased with the decision.





“We’re encouraged that the B.L.M. lifted their moratorium, but we’re only halfway there,” said Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association. “We now need to get them to expedite the permitting of the solar projects on public land.”





Mr. Resch said the decision was important given that while the bureau managed to approve a considerable number of oil and gas leases on public land, it “had yet to lease a single acre of land to the solar industry.”





Political opposition to the freeze was also a factor in the turnaround, and Ms. Boddington noted that there was “significant Congressional interest in the issue.”





On Tuesday, Representative Mark Udall, Democrat of Colorado, wrote a letter to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, urging the government to continue processing new applications.





In response to the bureau’s change of course, Mr. Udall said in a statement, “This decision sends the right message to the renewable-energy industry that we are committed to working with them to reduce our reliance on foreign oil and increase our energy independence in an environmentally sound way.”
IN 10 YEARS%26lt; it would lower prices%26gt; ONLY in 10 Years we need to be off OIL all together!
The same reason that a dog doesn't crap where it sleeps. Why aren't Republicans as smart as a dog?
the fact is any drilling done today wont impact a thing for at least 10 years. no B/S,just a fact.
How about all the wildlife it will kill off?
Well, what have they said? I doubt they'd just say 'no' and not give a reason.
THE PENGUINS!!! DEAR GOD, WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE PENGUINS?????

Will the congress pass legislation to drill oil on McCain?

McCain is so old maybe there is some oil there. Come on congress pass it soon.Will the congress pass legislation to drill oil on McCain?
Now that the Democrat controls both the House and the Senate, there's no way in Hell or Heaven that we gonna allow them to drill in Anwar.





Drilling in Anwar (off the coast of Florida) DOES NOT help lower gas price. Why?





The fact is, we don't even know ';how much'; oil is under there. Just because we know it's oil there doesn't mean it's full of oil. That's the boneheadness of the Republican leaders and seeing how the oil executive are enriching themselves while ordinary Americans are paying outrageous at the pump, I don't see it being lucrative to drill for more oil.





The answer is to slap a big fat windfall tax and force them invest in energy away from oil. In order to do that, we have to keep the Republican out of power and allow a Democrat President to do the job.





McCain won't do sh/t, you can believe that, too.








Obama 08!!Will the congress pass legislation to drill oil on McCain?
Yes. If they digg it, then they would find lots of money.


Price of Gas was around $1.10 when Bill Clinton was in office 8 years ago.


It rose to $1.50 after the ENRON/Cheney conspiracy.


It was around $2.00 before Bush invaded Iraq.


It was around $3.00 last year.


It is around $4.00 today.


It would be around $9.00 in two years if McCain wins.
Yes, but it has nothing to do with McCain. After they charge you enough, you'll be screaming for anything to make gas go down. It will happen if Obama gets elected too.
Not as long a Congressmen keep receiving gratuities from the big oil companies.
I hope so. There's more oil in his head than there is in the ground in the US.
do you think he's kinda oily? he seems to be pretty powdered down when he's on tv....
He does look like he just left the Greasy Spoon.

Should we allow oil companies to drill in banned drilling areas?

Nobody knows if increasing our domestic oil outflow will decrease oil prices. We can increase our domestic oil outflow by 1.5million barrels of oil per day. Domestically, we presently produce 1.5million barrels of oil per day. Within the next 10years, we will demand more oil and foreign countries will too. The world's outflow of oil is 87million barrels per day. Most experts think that by the year 2015, the world will demand 115million barrels of oil per day. There are no plans to meet future oil demand. In otherwords, I don't think drilling in banned USA areas will decrease oil prices. Oil drilling will hurt the environment and force residents to move from coastal areas. I think we will live with high gas prices until we rely on alternative forms of energy.





The USA should spend more money for developing alternative energy technologies.Should we allow oil companies to drill in banned drilling areas?
i agree. i do belive though for a time they should open up some fields here to take a little of the pressure off the high demand out of the middle east. but i want them if they are going to do that to develop alternative fuels before the demand gets to high.Should we allow oil companies to drill in banned drilling areas?
I see much good that can come from developing alternate energy sources. Do it!





That said, any added oil production, even if it is 10 years out, will help keep the price of oil down. May not be today, but it will make a difference.





Here in the USA we have enough reserves, counting the oil shale the USA as I understand it, counting the oil shale to entirely supply this country with fuel for about 300 years, not importing a drop.





Edit: Note to shawn p ... Yes we do have enough oil here for that, in processable oil shale. Production of it was banned by congress on federal lands last year as a add on to a tax bill....


I work in the Oil industry, and have seen the oil produced from some test projects using oil shale... it is here. Allow more refineries to be built, as often oil production is restricted in local fields due to no refineries in the area are able to process more than they already have.
Yes we should. We are much too dependent on foreign oil. Of course we need to develop alternative energy, but that takes time, and in the meantime we have to have the oil. That's just reality.





Also, it would cause an immediate drop in gas prices. Speculators will see a promising future and invest accordingly, resulting in an immediate drop in prices.
Since in the last 3 months the American public has driven 30 billion fewer miles then that means the supply of gasoline has increased by that amount, yet even when supply increases they continue to raise prices! No more drilling, no more subsidies, no more tax advantages, no more grants for oil companies! No more support of any kind, militarily or not! Even if they drilled in every square foot of the US it would not change anything because they will just sell it overseas anyway and then it will be sold back to the American public at a higher price! Stop the insanity now! When are the oil companies going to pay the taxpayers for all the oil they've extracted from federally owned lands in the past?
I hope the Oil CEO'S were lying to congress ( just last month ) when they admitted to Congress that





-the US is already the #3 largest producer of oil in the world..... and will become #1 if allow drilling in Alaska?





-It only cost $10 to make a Barrel of Oil but trade of Greed Street for $130 a barrel





-We Export a lot of Oils ( to Japan )





-Demand is now low ( so why are we drilling for more )





-Supply is now higher ( so what are we going to do with the extra oils ? )





-Oils produced in the US are as expensive as oils produce in the Middle east because they are trade on Greed Street





-All the CEO's and Presidents testifying in congress work for European Corporations but push to drill in Alaska for FREE!!!!!!! because it won't happen in Europe!!!!
McCain supports a multi-pronged approach to energy production, including more drilling and new nuclear power plants. It makes sense. I certainly have no objection to alternative energy technologies, but they will not emerge from government bureaucracies. And, if you know anything about the futures market (apparently you do not), you know that petroleum futures would drop precipitously if the U.S. opened new oil fields for exploration and production. The current price of gas at the pump is a bubble price. We need to break the bubble.
OK, how much of your pay check are you willing to give to develop those alternative technologies?





Cause like it or not, that is where it will come from.





As for me and my house, I don't want to give one red cent.
I totally agree with your statement. We have to get away from oil dependency and find alternate sources of energy. At the moment we are basically being held hostage by the major oil producing countries.
Think a little deeper and with some more research you will find that most oil goes into the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. I haven't found a way to develop new drugs with windmills.
Yes, yes yes.





Either that or have those against drilling pay an additional 10/gallon to subsidize those for it.
Should we?? Yes.
At this point, some people are banking on a ';magic'; alternative energy solution that does not yet exist. Hydrogen, for example is an energy conversion technique verses an energy source. ( Have you seen any hydrogen wells lately?) Yes, Solar and wind power can deliver a few energy crumbs but they cannot provide the massive amounts of energy needed. Given that oil fields take 8 to 10 years to develop and there isn't a viable alternative yet, the oil fields should be developed. Failure to do so will result in economic collapse and starvation. The oil situation now is causing starvation in the poorest parts of the world and it will get far worse. Domestic oil production has the added and very significant advantage of reducing the trade deficit. Huge amounts of money is leaving the country to buy oil. Domestic production at least keeps the money at home.





If you lay a graph of the Gross Domestic Product over energy consumption, the graphs are identical. In the 70's, for example, GDP dropped right along with energy consumption. When energy consumption went up GDP went up and the recession was over.





Free market forces alone cannot be relied on to provide for cheap energy and stave off environmental damage (Assuming that global warming is not natural). The government can intervene by requiring higher fleet gas mileages, lowering speed limits, relaxing safety requirements for vehicles and promoting higher efficiency systems such as offering tax rebates for increasing insulation, installing solar hot water heaters, heat recovery units and the like.





The proposal to build 45 nuclear power plants is a good one. It will provide a base of energy production from which alternate fuels such as hydrogen can be developed and a bridge to the future without mass collapse. Right now, we are in a situation where we would be burning coal or oil to make the hydrogen, a fundementally inefficient process.





I have no doubt that technologies will be developed that will make oil largely obsolete; however, we cannot bet our lives that they will be developed in time and must take appropriate action with what we have and know now.
scrape a few more years out of oil, and for what? to destroy yet another eco-system only to have be running out again in a few years?





i could understand if there were huge stock piles and we could live for hundreds of years off it or something... but there's no that much oil to be had.





';OK, how much of your pay check are you willing to give to develop those alternative technologies?





Cause like it or not, that is where it will come from.





As for me and my house, I don't want to give one red cent';





that's the exact kinda attitude that's gonna bring humanity to a halt someday in the not so distant future.... ask any scientist... we're exhausting numerous resources at staggering rates....





cause like it or not this work has got to be done sooner or later, we cannot live off of oil much longer no matter what we do... we have no alternative BUT to find a new alternative... wake up.





taking into account how long it takes to invent, and then apply on a global scale, new technologies, i'd say we're in desperate need of that research NOW..... it's kind of sad really, most people (especially here in america) go on every day living their lives confident nothing bad could ever happen and anyone that says anything else is just paranoid or the like... but that's becuase they're just so used to being able to hand money out and get whatever they want in exchange.... i think few really seem to grasp the concept that most of our resources from oil to gold are limited.... and someday they will run out...
Of course we should allow it. The land already leased has shown not to have enough oil to make it profitable to drill, so we have to go where the oil is. This country has to have gas now - for everything from school buses to airplanes. In the meantime we need to look for alternative fuels, but it will take many years before America can completely revert to alternative energy.





Drilling rigs are already off the coast of FL and do not damage the environment or tourism. There is a limit as to how close the rigs can be built. It is environmentally safe. During Katrina, the rigs were damaged, but didn't spill a drop of oil. The worst oil spill was Valdez and that was from importing oil, not domestic drilling.





Drilling for our own oil will make a difference in price, first because speculation will ease up, second because, including all our resources, shale, offshore, anwr, we have more oil than Saudi Arabia.

concealer

Can any conservative here defend Sean Hannity's claim that oil drilled here will stay here?

Republicans believe in free commerce, don't they? They support capitalism, right? So by what authority will the oil companies who drill for oil on American soil be compelled to keep the oil here to relieve prices at the pump? Why shouldn't they sell it overseas, where they will no doubt make a TON more money than they'd make selling it here?Can any conservative here defend Sean Hannity's claim that oil drilled here will stay here?
are you kidding ?? the oil will go to the one which will pay for it the most just like the oil from alaskaCan any conservative here defend Sean Hannity's claim that oil drilled here will stay here?
Much of the current ';peak oil'; mentality stems from the thought that governments are going to do little to increase future supplies.





A large producer signaling to the market that production will be increased would do much to ease the concerns that future supplies will be unable to keep pace with demand.





As far as oil being ';kept'; here, that much is hogwash. The oil companies should be free to sell their oil on any market that will fetch them the highest price.





But that doesn't mean that increased production will not relieve energy prices domestically too.
I will defend that position, because while you believe you are so far sighted you prefer shipping about 600 Billion dollars overseas to foreigners is better than keeping 600 Billion at home minus shipping costs due to shorter distance to ship oil. You would rather import Gasoline from foreigners because our refineries can't keep up production and your farsighted ness thinks that is a great Idea not to develop any more refineries. You would rather pay foreign truckers to bring the oil to the shipping points because you would rather hurt domestic truckers and keep their fuel costs going up. You are a rocket scientist trying to do biology.
Hannity is an idiot who knows nothing about the logistics of oil production......or anything else of consequence for that matter.





Oil that is transported by sea like all of the Alaskan oil, is just as likely to go overseas as it is to go to the US.





All of the oil produced there has to be loaded onto tankers at Valdez. It's just as easy and cheap for the producers to load onto tankers bound for Japan or China as it is to load it on tankers bound for L.A. or Houston. And the Japanese and Chinese have to import their oil anyway. It's closer for them to ship it from Alaska than it is to ship it from the Middle East.
First off I'm a Libertarian, but he is likely right that the oil will stay here if market rates are paid for it. If the expectation is that U.S. oil companies who take the risk, drill here and find oil here will sell it cheaper that the market price, well that is just plain absurd.





Energy independence does not mean cheap energy. Don't believe me, look at Britain. They have the treasured ';energy independence'; with the North Sea, but don't have cheap energy.
OK, where would we send it?


It does cost money to ship it.





If oil sells at $100 a barrell, You want to get $100 a BBL


Now if it costs $10 BBL to ship it away and it sells for $100, You are now selling it at $90 + $10 shipping to make that $100 BBL price. WHY would you want to only make $90 when you can make $100?
they can and will but a bulk will be sold here for less and make the same amount of profit since they don't have to ship it overseas where there is already an abundance of oil in the middle east and russia.





If you take the United States out of the equation that uses 40% of the oil then there will be an abundance with current supplies. Therefore prices will drop everywhere. more here than anywhere else since we don't have a socilized government YET like in germany that has $15 per gallon gas.





See what you have to look forward to LIBERALS!!!





I GUESS THE TRUTH HURTS...





I'M SAYING THE SAME THING THE FIRST GUY DID AND HAVE 3 NEG'S LOL!
It is VASTLY CHEAPER to keep the oil close to where it will be used due to transportation costs.





That's simple economics, yes?





The reason is costs more overrseas is because of the TRANSPORTATION of it.





Either way it doesn't matter WHERE it's used. If we say we are going to drill then the world oil price will tank overnight. That helps us all.
First, ANY competition to foreign oil would be helpful in reducing gas prices. Second, I don't care if we sell some of the oil, the very fact that there will be more oil and we control it, again would mean better prices at the pump. Take an economics class, it's called supply and demand.
Big oil, as any other large corporation is only interested in maximizing profits and minimizing costs. Everything else is secondary.





They couldn't care less about keeping oil in America, you or I or the environment, or anything else. And they, like so many other large corporations have their teams of lobbyists paying off the politicians and influencing government decision in their favor.
Well, if the oil does go someplace else, then our trade deficit will drop.


Also, more oil worldwide means a drop in price.


Supply and demand.
No, it won't stay here but it will add to the global supply and drive all prices down.
Boy, you really, really need a simplified version of Econ 101 explained to you, don't you?!?





Repeat after me: It DOESN'T MATTER whether oil drilled here stays here or goes somewhere else!!! Go ahead and do it. And keep doing it until this simple, easy-to-remember fact sinks in.





Why, you ask? Well, it goes like this:





1 - Oil is a commodity (translation: for most practical purposes oil is oil is oil (i.e., it's ALL THE SAME STUFF)),





2 - Commodities are priced and traded on world markets,





3 - Purchasers of commodities buy them via commodity contracts purchased on world commodity markets at prices set by those markets (see #2 above), and





4 - The price, having been set by the market, and separate from transportation costs, IS THE SAME FOR ALL PURCHASERS buying the same contracts.





Bottom Line: It doesn't make any difference, except to the purchaser, as to where the oil comes from nor does the seller care one bit about who buys his oil nor where that buyer is located.
Hey, that is a very good question, but you have made an assumption that very well may not be true and you provide no support for your claim that they would make a ton of money from overseas.





Let me give you a little background here. If the oil is drilled here, it is refined here. Once the oil is refined, it would cost much more to ship overseas than it would to ship it to some regional location. Hence, profits would be greater.





Also, and this is the most important part of the whole question, the oil obtained from here, at least in Louisiana, is a light crude. It is not as valuable a product as you get from the Middle East. So initially, you profit potential is significantly reduced.





Not too many people know or realize those facts without in-depth research. I happen to know a little about this because of where I work and the people I work with.





But I have to say that is really a great, well conceived question and deserves a legitimate response.