For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Democrats want to nationalize oil refineries:
House Democrats responded to President's Bush's call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live. Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.
Is this what will happen next year if Obama is elected and the Democrats retain control of Congress? What will this do to oil and gas prices in the future? Would this be the beginning of the socialism most on the left really want, and therefore the beginning of the end of capitalism in this nation?
From an economic perspective, wouldn't such a move force most American companies to begin relocating their headquarters and manufacturing facilities elsewhere to prevent government takeover in the future?














Comments Policy
I keep hoping
June 19, 2008 - 10:08 ET by sarcasmoSome Democrat will suggest allowing refineries to actually be built instead, but so far, nothing...Oh, and the beginning of socialism already happened. It was the Fed's bailout of a firm called "Bear Stearns," and it had nothing to do with dumb refinery-socialism proposals.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
Sarc...
June 19, 2008 - 10:17 ET by ontheright...do you believe we need to build new refineries? and Nuclear power facilities?
Just curious. Hard to tell from your post.
Yes, and yes.
June 19, 2008 - 10:36 ET by sarcasmoThe government needs to try getting out of the way, so my "yes" is contingent of "we" NOT being the government. They have yet to try letting capitalism work to lower prices, and they're suggesting socialist ownership to fix their failure. Ownership by the government, if tried, will fail just like the public schools & the drugwar have failed when obese government was tried.
I've been pro-nuke forever, and now I'm rooting for the pebble bed reactor design to be mass produced & fit in a normal shipping container. Sadly, it won't be in this country... But a proposal of socialism, while offensive, isn't nearly as offensive as the real socialism of that socialist bailout nobody else seems to call "socialist." At least now they've got the fig-leaf of a couple of low-level arrests.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
"Oh, and the beginning of
June 19, 2008 - 15:05 ET by ckc1227"Oh, and the beginning of socialism already happened. It was the Fed's
bailout of a firm called "Bear Stearns," and it had nothing to do with
dumb refinery-socialism proposals."
I'm pretty sure it happened long before the Bear Stearns bailout.
Yes. I railed about CitiBank
June 19, 2008 - 15:13 ET by sarcasmoAnd "too big to fail" as socialist nonsense for years. I think I'm a capitalist. Others call me "a nut." Anyway, this latest socialist bailout is only the beginning. When the credit derivative default TRILLIONs finally hit the fan, we'll see the real problem with the Fed trying to print irresponsible financial institutions' way out of deserved fiscal trouble.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
The GOP has to do something
June 19, 2008 - 10:11 ET by shawn228Cheaper gas or securing our borders, the GOP has to do something to stop Obamas momentum. He now leads in 3 swing states.
Shawn I would be plenty
June 19, 2008 - 10:41 ET by Dan The Man 2Shawn I would be plenty worried if these polls had anything to do with electing a President, but as 2000 and 2004 showed they don't. There is only one poll that counts and that is the one November 4th, 2008. That is the one I will believe.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Dan the man
June 19, 2008 - 10:49 ET by shawn228Again 2000 and 2004 the polls had the race too close to call, which is exactly what happenned.
Polls are important, because they how voters are feeling at the Present moment, a year ago we thought Clinton and Guiliani would be the nominees.
Polls also predicted the Dems would take back congress in 06 and McCain would win the GOP nomination.
Its too early to predict the election will turn out, but don't forget, the polls all had McCain ahead by 10 points a few months ago after the whole Reverand Wright thing.
In 2004 the polls were not
June 19, 2008 - 11:11 ET by Dan The Man 2In 2004 the polls were not even close except in your imagination. My point is that it is not worth getting your pantis in a bunch because some poll, likely skewed, says Obama is leading. We still have 5 months ahead and I am confident that Obama will open his trap and give the GOP a present, and he will do this again and again.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Yes 04 was too close to call
June 19, 2008 - 11:20 ET by shawn228and it came down to Ohio. Well I'm glad your confident. The GOP lost 2 house seats they owned for over 20 yrs and were desperate to defend. I'm glad your not nervous about the Dem tital wave
Here is a link to a msm poll
and another
Seems pretty close to me.
2004 was not close except
June 19, 2008 - 11:26 ET by bassndude2004 was not close except in the polls. It was the medias way of generating votes for the dems. Shawn, look at the polls of late! They are geared to get the answers they want. Look at the questions, not the answers, to understand. The polls by the MSM in '04 were to set up another challenge to the election, like '00. Thats all they were. The margin of the win was not even close.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Sorry Bass
June 19, 2008 - 11:34 ET by shawn228I have no idea how you can say the margin of the win was not even close. It all came down to Florida and Gore won in the popular vote.
A few months ago the polls all had McCain winning by double digits, no one on this site complained of the bias polls then.
Gotta go to work, have a good day.
I said the '04 election,
June 19, 2008 - 11:38 ET by bassndudeI said the '04 election, not the '00. Reread
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
bassdude
June 19, 2008 - 21:18 ET by shawn228yes you are right, sorry, I was in a hurry to get out the door. 04 was still pretty darn close. Yes the President won in the popular vote, but it all came down to Ohio right?
Dewey Defeats Truman
June 19, 2008 - 20:10 ET by UnsaneRemember, shawn, that spectacular Dewey presidency? How he so handily swept Truman from office in 1948?
By the way, winning the popular vote does not matter. The only thing that matters is the electoral vote. Had The National Tree merely won his "homestate" of TN, the FL controversy would have been 100% academic, something lost on countless Leftists.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Hows that?
June 19, 2008 - 15:47 ET by general companyDan: There is only one poll that counts and that is the one November 4th, 2008. That is the one I will believe.
Shawn : Polls are important, because they how voters are feeling at the Present moment, a year ago we thought Clinton and Guiliani would be the nominees.
Shawn: Polls also predicted the Dems would take back congress in 06 and McCain would win the GOP nomination
Did you not understand what Dan had suggested, are you contradicting him or yourself?
So in 06 we new McCain would win the nom, but a year ago we thought it would be Giuliani?
My understanding of what Dan said is that none of the polls are worth the paper or lcd's they are written on, what yours?
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Polls
June 19, 2008 - 21:24 ET by shawn228No general company, the polls in 06 predicted the GOP would lose as much as 20-30 seats in the house.
The polls said McCain would most likely win the nomination in January of this year.
I meant exactly what I said, polls are important, because it lets us know how people are feeling at the moment. People wanted Guiliani over a yr ago, then it shifted to McCain
It is a long, long time
June 19, 2008 - 13:37 ET by Pete Wilsonuntil the Election. Heck, the conventions have not even occured yet. Obama has not been completely vetted yet. Of course, the MSM will not aid in the vetting, but only of the covering of the radical views I suspect he holds. I suspect this because of the company he has kept in the past.
Therefore, I would not be terribly concerned about Obama's lead in the polls in swing states at this time. Many things will change between now and November.
I do agree, however, that the GOP simply has to show some courage on some issues, primarily in the two you cited. Also, McCain has got to stop reading from the Democrat playbook on "obscene profits and salaries of CEOs". I have yet to determine what leval of profit is proper, or non-obscene, or exactly what level of compensation is proper for a CEO. I would suspect that the level of compensation of a CEO is acceptable if the shareholders and board of directors determine that it is.
Cheaper gas and secure boarders from Obama?
June 19, 2008 - 10:50 ET by Dee BunkYou must be nuts. That is complete crazy talk.
Dee
June 19, 2008 - 10:58 ET by shawn228I meant what points the GOP must drive home to stop Obama's momentum, sorry I thought Iwas clear, I will try to express myself in a more accurate fashion next time.
Shawn228, These polls are
June 19, 2008 - 10:59 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
These polls are meaningless.
1) Polls are not scientific, I don't care what anyone says. From the way that you can ask the question, to the number of people asked, etc, etc....polls are not scientific. Never have and never will be.
2) Polls so far away from the election are meaningless. Summer polls are completly meaningless. People are not paying attention.
3) According to "scientific" polls, in 2000 Bush was suppose to lose. In 2002, Republicans were suppose to lose Congress. In 2004 Bush and Republicans were suppose to lose. We know better, don't we.
Shawn228, don't be so worried right.
By the way, how stupid can Democrats be and anyone that votes for them.
Nationalize industries? Wow, since it worked so well for Cuba, Soviet Union, China, N. Korea, Venezuela.
An Obama Presidency scares the hell out of me.
Republicans and Conservatives, I know McCain is not our ideal candidate, but my goodness, he is infinitly better than Obama.
I truly believe that this election will define America for decades to come. I truly feel, applying my Political Science degree here, that this is a defining moment for America. This will either mark for America or a great success.
What most Americans do not know or understant is how Chicago politics work.
In Chicago left wingers, Liberals have slowly, but surely under the radar, been building power, influence, putting people in the right places. Obama is the culmination of their efforts. If Obama wins, you will see terrorists like William Ayers making decisionn on the education of your kids. You will see individuals like Rev. Wright visiting the White House (like under the Clinton administration) advising the President Obama and this ONLY the tip of the iceberg.
Four years of Obama will destroy America.
Sorry to repeat myself, but I feel that this election is a defining moment for America, much like the 1998 election in Venezuela was a defining moment for Venezuela.
We must defeat Obama! Our children, our country are counting on us.
fut
June 19, 2008 - 11:12 ET by shawn228Nowhere in my post did I say I was going to vote for Obama. The all showed Bush tied with Kerry in 04. Polls almost always predict the winner of an election if it is beyond 5 percentage points.
Polls are not meaningless, because they can determine how people feel at the moment. The GOP was actually ahead in the 06 elections, all the polls showed that, until the whole Mark Foley thing happenned.
And just like the polls predicted, the GOP lost the house. I polls were wrong and they said the Dems would fall about a seat short of taking back the senate, but they took that too. Okay maybe polls aren't always correct:-)
Shawn228, Eh? Don't get
June 19, 2008 - 11:35 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Eh? Don't get so defensive. No where did I accuse you of voting for Obama. Don't worry, I know you are a Liberal, but at least you aren't that dumb. :-)
As for the polls, sorry my friend, I studied this in college, in my current job, etc. Polls are meaningless, they are.
think about it this way, I put up an open house for the university I work for, right? 100 people attend, correct? I then put out a survey (poll) to be filled out by the 100 people that attended. I only get back 10 to 15. Are you telling me that I should base any changes that I make to the open house on these 10 to 15 people that replied? Of course not.
We are a nation of 3 million people. And these polls are based on 500 to 3,000 people. Are you telling me that these amount on people, through "scientific" polls can tell what the other 2.98 million are thinking? c'mon, don't fool yourself.
Also, just look at the ridiculous margins of errors on polls....they are pathetic.
Finally, you might want to look at studies done by the Harris Poll CEO who studied well over 87 polling firms around the world, 10 of them in the USA and he was astonished at what he found. That the so called scientific method being used was NOT scientific at all. He also found that out of the 87 polling firms, NONE used the same method or questions for polling. Hmmm...doen't science demand that the same method be used? yes. So much for the "scientific" poll. This is a myth so people fall for silly polls.
Also, in the past, say 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, no self-respecting media corporation would publicicze a poll if the respond rate was not at least 50% or higher and in many cases 70% or higher was demanded. Today most polls are published with only 20% respondent rate.
Shawn228, in 2000 and 2004 Bush was suppose to lose. Let us not forget how the media claimed that early exist polls in 2004 matched their polls, that Kerry would win the Presidency. Bush won by a large margin in 2004.
These same polls said that Republicans would lose control of Congress in 2002 and 2004, ooops, they were wrong.
So, out of 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006, the polls only got it right in 2006?
hmmm....Polls were not needed in 2006 to know that Republicans were going to lose control of Congress. I knew that in 2005 without any stupid polls. Long before the Foley scandal.
Not to mention that the Republican party went against hitorical trends in 2002 and 2004. The Party that controls the White House loses control of Congress. That didn't happen to Republicans until 2006.
Don't be such a Liberal (i know you can't help it) and stop basing your life decisions on polls. :-)
"We are a nation of 3
June 19, 2008 - 14:59 ET by ckc1227"We are a nation of 3 million people. And these polls are based on 500
to 3,000 people. Are you telling me that these amount on people,
through "scientific" polls can tell what the other 2.98 million are
thinking? c'mon, don't fool yourself. "
3 million? You might want to do a recount. ;)
Ooops....300 million
June 19, 2008 - 18:25 ET by futbolisgreat1Ooops....300 million people....a little off on my count.
However, my point still stands! Polls are worthless!
These Congressional...
June 19, 2008 - 10:11 ET by ontheright...posers have exposed themselves as idiots, yet again.
Refineries are at the end of the oil supply "flow". Controlling the refineries would only facilitate controlling the supply of gasoline and other petroleum products used directly by the consumer (may be the intent, knowing these criminals).
And even if refineries did somehow control the "flow" of the oil supply; is this what we/USA needs? More beauracy? Better management through larger Government?
Do these boobs believe the American people are brain-dead sheople? This is further proof that we, the LEGAL citizens of the United States, need to rise up and vote these fools out of office before they destroy our economy, future and the country we love.
When will we hear about
June 19, 2008 - 10:14 ET by FastEdthe poor folks in New Orleans, those who don't have any way to get out of the city? Will we see more complaining, like all those who are complaining now? Where's the Government? How come GW didn't see this coming?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
An announcement
June 19, 2008 - 10:19 ET by FoolicanI would like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to the five smartest posters on NewsBusters:
Here's to the true thinkers. Keep up the good work, folks!
Surely...
June 19, 2008 - 10:20 ET by ontheright...you jest. Otherwise, I've lost all respect...
I notice that
June 19, 2008 - 10:21 ET by Hero SquadI notice that Foolican isn't on that list.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
He just wishes he was :-)
June 19, 2008 - 10:23 ET by shawn228He just wishes he was :-)
Who?
June 19, 2008 - 10:26 ET by MeanderingI don't know who you are talking about.
Fool - you left out 5 people
June 19, 2008 - 10:35 ET by Dee BunkFoolican
Clever Pig
J Frank
Jer
Which Wing
So lets see that would be 5 + 5 which = 10. Hummmmmmm I heard that number somewhere before about liberals claiming there weren't that many regular liberals on here. Hummmmm.
Lol foolican
June 19, 2008 - 10:38 ET by shawn228your sarcasm has backfired on you huh? Now your included in our club. Lol.
Don't associate me with
June 19, 2008 - 10:39 ET by FoolicanDon't associate me with those folks. I don't buy into the liberal mantra. I just wanted to puff up their ego a little bit. Mine doesn't need any more puffing.
Who yanked your chain this
June 19, 2008 - 11:06 ET by balboaWho yanked your chain this morning?
Bal, I think somebody wee-wee'd in Fooly's corn flakes. :-)
June 19, 2008 - 23:32 ET by R D HelmThe truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
Oops!!!! I forgot Jason - how could I forget Jason!
June 19, 2008 - 10:40 ET by Dee BunkThat would make 11. Sorry Jason!
I forgot 6 more so that's at least 17 liberals not including
June 19, 2008 - 11:22 ET by Dee Bunkthe one's who just post once in a rare while
Thought Police
Anamericaninnihon
Intellectualhonesty
Biff McCain
Bruzilla
Amby (previously the professor)
I'm sure I'm still forgetting some.
Dee, I'm not sure
June 19, 2008 - 11:43 ET by MassConservDee, I'm not sure ThoughtPolice belongs in that list.
I've always had the impression that he's a libertarian blinded by Trutherism. Like, gone so far East it seems West.
Mass - I consider all leftist libertarians on the liberal list
June 19, 2008 - 11:47 ET by Dee BunkWhichwing is the same. I don't put sarc there because he doesn't hate the military and have total BDS like the leftist ones do.
Point taken.
June 19, 2008 - 11:52 ET by MassConservPoint taken.
Giles is pretty far out
June 19, 2008 - 12:57 ET by general companyGiles is pretty far out there and the angry African
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
gc.... Shhh...it has been
June 19, 2008 - 23:41 ET by bigtimergc....
Shhh...it has been nice without aA.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
You are are all forgetting Montana Lyons and, of course, Hater.
June 19, 2008 - 23:50 ET by R D HelmThe latter being the most vile troll to ever crawl the threads of NewsBusters.
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
RD... Shhhh...! Don't
June 19, 2008 - 23:57 ET by bigtimerRD...
Shhhh...!
Don't wake them...let sleeping dogs lie.
By the way...Little Jimmy and yellerdawg were even worse than hater...you just weren't here yet.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
bt, let's not forget Eugene, AKA tumbler, who hated me with a...
June 20, 2008 - 00:04 ET by R D Helm...flaming purple passion. :-)
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
RD...LOL... Who can foget
June 20, 2008 - 00:07 ET by bigtimerRD...LOL...
Who can foget the tumbster...he was an equal opportunity hater..you weren't the lone stranger.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
Tumbler's not gone
June 20, 2008 - 00:09 ET by Cool ArrowDidn't he reincarnate as a soccer enthusiast?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE
Riled One... NO. Not
June 20, 2008 - 00:12 ET by bigtimerRiled One...
NO.
Not even close.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
He was not a troll but who could forget......
June 20, 2008 - 00:14 ET by shawn228Sports Politics. No one could put down Paris Hilten or Elizabeth Hasselbeck in his presense.
LOL shawn...you are right,
June 20, 2008 - 00:19 ET by bigtimerLOL shawn...you are right, he wasn't a troll, he just went off the deep end a lot....then there was keith.
What happened to him?
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
bt
June 20, 2008 - 00:22 ET by shawn228I'm not sure, maybe the aspiring actor fell off the stage one too many times lol
Speaking of aspiring actors
June 20, 2008 - 00:27 ET by Cool ArrowWhere has Keith been?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE
bt, remember "go pluck a cactus?" :-)
June 20, 2008 - 00:24 ET by R D HelmIf you don't, I'll give you a little hint.
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
RD...Wow...just got
June 20, 2008 - 01:03 ET by bigtimerRD...
Wow...just got back..cannot believe you saved that one...although I do remember it well...just not the cactus part...wow that guy made a person mad before all the morning coffee was down, so I was pretty hot that day...the day he got kicked of for good was the day I won't forget..which I least expected too...
Now there is always good ol' lillie-pad as I always called the drive by poster, as she was most times, but she did make a few exceptions here and there...which were infuriating in themselves...talk about a leftist witch.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
bt, sorry. Can't talk about rl.
June 20, 2008 - 01:09 ET by R D HelmLOL-NWIM?
:-^)
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
RD... Sorry...didn't
June 20, 2008 - 01:23 ET by bigtimerRD...
Sorry...didn't know.
Gotcha'.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
Hostile, bitter, angry Leftist posters
June 20, 2008 - 00:12 ET by UnsaneI nominate the hate-filled Tom Custer/Zapata.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Uns... LOL...man oh
June 20, 2008 - 00:16 ET by bigtimerUns...
LOL...man oh man...I fogot about him.
Memories....
Of course we could throw in FatesW...
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
From the Memory Department
June 20, 2008 - 00:31 ET by UnsaneLet's not forget about MassLiberal!!!
I would nominate throatwobbler if he wasn't so one-track.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Good gosh Unsane...I was
June 20, 2008 - 00:40 ET by bigtimerGood gosh Unsane...I was here posting that night he had his final breakdown...it was like nothing I have ever, ever seen...and that was something to behold!
What a bunch of crazies in this world.
What a good memory you have.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
I have a good memory too.....
June 20, 2008 - 00:43 ET by shawn228American Rhetoric Review
shawn, wow, I had forgotten all about ARR.
June 20, 2008 - 00:50 ET by R D HelmLOL-Just shows how forgettable he truly was. :-)
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
RD.... Very true...but I
June 20, 2008 - 01:18 ET by bigtimerRD....
Very true...but I do wonder whatever happened to florida chad..or vrwc...haven't seen them in ages.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Wilson
bt, and don't forget randy.
June 20, 2008 - 20:39 ET by R D HelmI have seen him in here a few times recently, but he doesn't seem to be his old self.
LOL-The lobotomy must have been successful.
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
or sumting thar RD
June 20, 2008 - 20:43 ET by botgrhayes has been here but he ain't no daisy, no daisy at all.
Support our Troops
More from the Memory Dept.
June 20, 2008 - 00:49 ET by UnsaneThanks!
I miss whinylillie and the automated drone Jozef F.
joe_conservative with his vitriolic attacks on everything conservative.
Ever notice that when you slap them around enough (especially true in the case of whinylillie), they turn into pathetic drive-by posters??? :-)
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Unsane, and what about chimp evil? (sp)
June 20, 2008 - 00:40 ET by R D HelmAnd didn't Rog once refer to throaty as "throat pecker?"
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
Hey if I ever start acting
June 20, 2008 - 00:25 ET by Cureboy675Hey if I ever start acting really "troll"y (Is that a word?), give me a good smack on the head. I first started coming to this site because I loved the basic premise of it (the fact that the media should never be biased, it shouldn't be biased towards conservatives and it should never be biased towards liberals).
And then I started sticking around because sometimes I just love to argue...And I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with arguing, as long as its not mean-spirited and spiteful and just trying to make people mad.
The only time I'll ever start to get nasty with somebody is if they start with the personal attacks, ya know?
"I don't want your 'us or them'..." -- The Cure
I've skinned every one of
June 19, 2008 - 11:03 ET by NL207I've skinned every one of them.
Somehow, I've missed you. That will have to be rectified.
Foolican, Please clean
June 19, 2008 - 11:55 ET by futbolisgreat1Foolican,
Please clean your nose....there is something brown coming out of it.
and your lips are quite brown too.
Please .. whilst I disagree
June 19, 2008 - 12:03 ET by Jack BauerPlease .. whilst I disagree with a lot of what bal says, and many of shawn's musings --
They really don't deserve to be lumped with those other three!
That would be cruel and unusual punishment.
Foolican, equating shawn and bal with...
June 19, 2008 - 23:30 ET by R D Helm...Attention Deficit guy (that's you, AD), The Curator and Syrius is stretching things a bit.
Actually, it is stretching things a lot.
The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz
Unfortuantely yes, yes, and
June 19, 2008 - 10:22 ET by motherbeltUnfortuantely yes, yes, and yes.
Obama has said We can't drill our way out of the problem
Apparently he thinks we can control or mandate our way out of it:
....Well, here's the problem. We account for about 3% of the world's oil reserves. We use about 25% of the world's oil. We can't drill our way out of the problem. It's estimated that if we in fact opened up drilling despite the environmental consequences which are irreversible, but let's say we decided You know what, we'll drill in Alaska and we'll drill off the continental shelf, its estimated that it would take five years before you saw any impact, in terms of actual world oil supplies, minimum, I mean, that's optimistic. But even then, the experts estimate maybe you'd see four cents, three cents per gallon reductions. So then one of the questions we have to ask ourselves is, Is it worth it for us to damage the environment permanently that our children are counting on when we could obtain much bigger reductions in gas prices just by increasing fuel efficiency standards on cars to 40 miles per gallon for example.
What happened to the Democrats' "common sense plan to reduce the price of gasoline"?
He says it would take years. He thinks nothing would happen until the oil actually gets to the pumps. How long does he think it will take to have even 25% of cars on the road getting 40 mpg? Does he think THAT will happen overnight???
And this is the guy who wants to run the country?
MB...
June 19, 2008 - 10:37 ET by ontheright...you make some good, almost relevant points (enviromentalist talking points all). However, the effect of us drilling in our own backyard (environmental impact being minimal - as proven when Katrina destroyed several rigs in the Gulf without any remarkable/catastrophic spills at all) will do several things:
1. Improve our domestic economy; increased drilling = more jobs = more money back into the economy = more money for R&D for alternative energy solutions.
2. Lessen the stranglehold OPEC has on global price fixing.
3. Reduce, no matter how slightly, our dependence on foreign produced oil
4. Beat other countries (namely China) to the reserves right off the shores of our own country.
Just my 2 cents.
ontheright....
June 19, 2008 - 11:37 ET by motherbeltontheright....I had edited my comment, and forgot to italicize the section beginning with "Well here;s the problem...."
Those were Obama's environmentalist points, not mine. My thoughts started with "what happened to the Democrats' plan...."
I strongly disagree with all of his contentions.
I agree with you that the process of drilling now would affect things, because the speculation is on "futures." Seeing an increased supply down the road would affect the price now.
It didn't end up clear...I think not doing anything now because it will take 5 years is stupid. Apparently Obama doesn't think that's worth the wait, but waiting 5 years to have a bunch of cars on the road that get 40 mpg is reasonable.
Thank goodness...
June 19, 2008 - 12:18 ET by ontheright...I thought I was losing my mind and watching one of the more articulate and clear thinkers on this site losing his/her's as well.
You are absolutely right, to do nothing while we wait for "new technology" to deliver us from one of the worst environmentalist caused catastrophes of our times is nothing more than continuing the previous 20-30 year Democrat "mandated" status quo.
Thanks for the clarification!
I caught that as well.
June 19, 2008 - 11:05 ET by general companyI caught that as well. Since oil prices have ballooned because of speculative purchases. What does he think will happen when congress kills the no drilling moratorium. The prices will fall, because OPEC wants us to use their oil, they will try to keep the price low enough that our oil companies will not see any profit in drilling.
The bottom line is, most everyone see's the need to lesson our need for oil. But using scare tactics like global warming and other misguided themes just scare the speculators into making all they can make now, and trying to guarantee those profits for as long as possible. Their is no current supply problem that can justify the doubling of gas in the last 2yrs, it is a scary future problem that is driving the price. Why does anyone think that SA upped its production the other day? I think it was because they are afraid we may actually be serious about weaning ourselves off of foreign energy. Obama is extremely thick if he cant see these very simple issues, does he also think we should be buying most every other product from overseas?
This is the beauty of the whole idea imo, once we allow drilling, OPEC will be forced to lower its price to our profit margin or go broke. When we drill, we have more influence on the market price.
One more thing, it also allows us more influence on other countries behavior, right now we have no influence on them, quit the opposite. The higher prices just give Iran and other thug countries more cash to use in evil ways.
In fact I have been waiting for Iran to step up its violence in Iraq because of the extra cash they now have, hope I am wrong though.
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
The Problem
June 19, 2008 - 11:24 ET by JDWOPEC decides to increase drilling by 500,000 plus barrels and the news media gets up and dances yet sat in silence at the prospect of 1M barrels out of ANWR. You know all of the details.
My wife is taking my daughter to FL as a graduation present and they are flying on Southwest. Southwest has not incurred the additional costs competition has and isn't passing them on to it's passengers in the way of $50 per bag... Southwest purchased futures in the oil market and has locked into pricing from which to operate for an extended period of time. Many other business which require oil have done the same yet not all came out ahead as did Southwest.
The majority of America wants to start drilling and we are being ignored, again, by the libs in congress. Obama wants change, he is interested in what we are saying yet he will not listen to the fact that Americans want to drill.
I stopped briefly at Gretta last night to see a woman describe the pristine area of ANWR.
Then there are the 68 million acres under lease which these profit monkey oil companies are just sitting on waiting for the prices to go up even further.
This may be the bomb which ultimately explodes in the DNC headquarters.
JDW
Will Ted Kennedy help write the universal health care bill?
Saying that beginning to
June 19, 2008 - 11:45 ET by jdhawkSaying that beginning to drill now will have no effect on the price of gasoline in five years is a true statement. That is if we in fact start drilling now, gasoline prices will not go up.
However, the consumption of oil is moving up about 3% a year worldwide. So, in five years, the world will be consuming 15% more oil than it does now.
If we start drilling now, we may be able to stave off the enevitable price increases brought about by increasing demand chasing too little supply.
If we do nothing - which is what the dimocrat authored and passed Energy Bill did - you can expect gasoline at $8 - 10 dollars a gallon in five years. Oil will sell for $200+.
Note the above math doesn't seem correct. That is oil will only go up 50% from here, but gasoline will double. The reason is that more and more of the oil we use is coming from outside the country. Likewise, more and more of that oil is being refined outside. It now stands at about 15% of domestic supply. When you tack on buying oil at market prices, refining outside the country and hauling it into the country, you get $8 - 10 dollar a gallon gasoline.
Oil
June 19, 2008 - 11:48 ET by Mulligan22Much of what you stated is Obama'a argument against more domestic exploration. It will takes too long it won't drop the price, etc. How does he know this?
I don't know where you get your information but Chuck Shumer wanted the Saudi's to increase their production by 1 million barrels because it would drop the price signifcantly, according to him. On the other hand 1 million barrels from ANWR would only drop it by pennies according to Mr. Shumer. See what I mean , who and what do you believe?
We import 67% of our oil now. How much more is enough 70, 75 80% or more? We aren't going to stop using oil anytime soon. They ain't gonna make a hybrid diesel semi to drop those Pruis' off at the dealership anytime soon.
Why is is ok for Canada to explore off the coast of Maine and we don't? Why is is ok for China to be exploring in the gulf? Vietnam wants an oil rig in the gulf as well. But not us. Think those guys are better at enviromenal issues than a US based company?
We can't drill our way out of this, but we got into it by not drilling is pretty evident. Affordable energy and food are the life blood of this country. Without it our government will be taking in less revenue, which means all those programs they like so much won't be funded. Which means they'll have to raise taxes to try to get the revenue, which will only slow things down more, and the cycle repeats.
Successful Government-run Program?
June 19, 2008 - 10:25 ET by MeanderingIts an oxymoron. If BHO wins and puts the gov. incharge of oil flow, get ready for $10-$20 a gallon gas as he will steal it all for himself. He'll be Hugo Chavez in America. Anytime the government plans a take over its the beginning of the end. When has the government successfully run anything without going into debt or making people wait forever?
Let's review BHO presidential goals:
-Pull troops out of Iraq, leaving Iran and other terrorists to take over and then we are in REAL trouble.
-Have the gov. take over oil companies so no one will have gas or heat for their homes.
-Those that do will be regulated to 65 degrees in their homes all year round, and limited in the miles they drive.
-Gov. run health care where our doctors will be subpar and have to wait 5 years to get a check up.
Did I miss anything? Sounds glorious, if you live in Cuba.
Hugo Chavez
June 19, 2008 - 10:30 ET by ApacheHa, I just posted the same thing before reading your post.
Apache, WELL SAID!!!
June 19, 2008 - 13:40 ET by futbolisgreat1Apache,
WELL SAID!!! Obama is the Hugo Chavez of the United States.
and you are right, Obama loves it. He is not ashamed of it!
I am Venezuelan, I follow Venezuelan politics very closely and the policy similarities of these two individuals is scary!
If Obama wins, this nation will be flushed down the toilet. It will take decades to undo the mess he will create in four years!
McCain can be bad stupid
June 19, 2008 - 10:28 ET by Apache