Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 283

• 0%

  STONERS5 months, 1 week ago

  "In response to record pump prices, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain and President George W. Bush this month called for Congress to end its moratorium on drilling off the East and West coasts and in Florida waters, leaving it up to each affected state to decide where to permit drilling."

  "McCain and Bush said the additional oil supplies likely to be found in the closed areas would help reduce gasoline costs."

  Reply

  76 Replies

  • 0%

    mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

    ""McCain and Bush said the additional oil supplies likely to be found in the closed areas would help reduce gasoline costs."

    --That's because Bush and McCain know that Americans will remember who was in the White House (and which party controlled Congress for most of Bush's term) when they lost their homes and jobs and when they first paid four dollars for a gallon of gas or a gallon of milk. They know Americans will remember who gave war time tax cuts to millionaires and who blathered on endlessly about "socialism" (while enjoying their tax payer funded health insurance) when they couldn't afford health insurance for their own kids. Republicans know that Americans know what they did last summer (and during all the previous summers under Bush) and they're TERRIFIED. Desperation will make cons say or do anything to hold on to power. ;-(

    Reply

    34 Replies

    • 0%

      saintetienne5 months, 1 week ago

      "Republicans know that Americans know what they did last summer (and during all the previous summers under Bush) and they're TERRIFIED."

      Gee, mesodud, I don't know who YOU hang around with, but I can honestly say I don't know ONE PERSON who is "TERRIFIED". I even have a few friends who are looking for work, but aren't all that concerned, because they have money saved up like any responsible person should. A few others squawk about the gas prices, but they take it in stride and are cutting back on car trips or taking public transportation to ease their gas spending. Other than that, everyone I know is moving on with their lives as usual, working their jobs, raising their families - no crises, no "terrified" feelings, no panic....

      What, do you belong to the Chicken Little Liberal Club, where everyone meets and shares their doomsday scenarios, building up panic amongst each other so you can run out into the streets, arms flailing, beaks screaming?

      Reply

      22 Replies

      • 0%

        UnusualSuspect5 months, 1 week ago

        I have to agree, for once, with Bill O'Reilly. He said on Monday's show (6.23.08) that even if we started today, drilling and refining, that the big oil companies would probably sell to who? You guessed it...China, India, etc.

        Why? Because China et al are willing to pay top dollar for it...that means $150, $175, $200 dollars a barrel.

        So even if we can get drilling set up offshore, or in ANWR, chances are we'll still have high prices at the pump, unless Congress passes a law that the oil companies can't sell to the Chinese first...

        Reply

        15 Replies

        • 0%

          saintetienne5 months, 1 week ago

          "unless Congress passes a law that the oil companies can't sell to the Chinese first.."

          Then why would oil companies want to drill at all?

          In case you haven't noticed, oil companies - like any other company - are in the business of making profits. They - like anyone else - will sell their product for the highest price, and why shouldn't they? Why be in business other than to make money? Putting government restrictions, tariffs and taxes on business isn't going to bring down the price, you nimrod. It's just going to make it harder to make money, interfere with production and ultimately raise prices at the gas pump. You dumb Democrats are sore at the oil companies (although why, I'll never know) and want to see them punished. What good is THAT going to do? It's just biting the hand that feeds you, and they're going to bite back by raising prices.

          So Unused Sunspeck, other than getting your fat ass out of your SUV and onto a bus - got any other bright ideas?

          Reply

          14 Replies

          • 0%

            UnusualSuspect5 months, 1 week ago

            Exactly, saint...

            They should be able to sell their oil at the highest price. That's my point...the end result is that we will still have high gas and oil prices, and there's very little we can do about it. Which is why it's more important than ever to fund the research and implementation of alternative energy.

            See, another assumption made by you is wrong...I don't own an SUV. I'm lucky...I work at home, fill up my tank about every 3-4 weeks and have begun to even walk to the Post Office, etc, a miie or so away.

            And what have you done to conserve, saint...care to tell us that? Don't be shy...we're all ears...

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              saintetienne5 months, 1 week ago

              "Don't be shy...we're all ears..."

              Well apparently you're not all eyes, because if you've been reading my posts for the last year and a half, I've been letting any chump who can read know that I live in Los Angeles - yes that's right, Los Angeles, city of cars and "no public transportation" - yet I take the subway to the office every ding-dang day. What's more, I've been taking public transportation - or biking - since 1998. 10 years being nearly car-free. It's perpetually summer here - with our weather, why anyone wouldn't take advantage of bike-riding and/or walking is beyond me.

              What's more, I give incentives to my employees to do the same, and about a third of them carpool or take public transportation every day.

              I don't mind bragging about this because I think it's something worth bragging about, and it bears repeating. Don't want to do it? O.K. by me, but then why do you keep harping and whining about the situation?

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • 0%

                UnusualSuspect5 months, 1 week ago

                OK...good to know you do that.

                I live in NY, just north of NYC, right near the MTA train into the city. When I have to go in, I take the train. But since I've worked at home the last 10 years, I don't spend much on gas.

                And you should brag...some people wouldn't do that even if they lived one block from the subway.

                BTW...I don't read every post on Netscape, so it is possible I miss a lot of info about people, but I will try to pay more attention in the future...

                Reply
          • 0%

            bonaroo5 months, 1 week ago

            saintetienne

            In almost every political map you look at, the Republicans are the most rural. Its your demographic that is hurting the most by high oil prices, and you're the ones who are crying the most. So.... just like my taxes that go to fund the Iraq war for oil, you want me to suck up more expense to subsidize your oil gluttony. Typewriter makers were in the business to make money too, but times change.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              svensun5 months, 1 week ago

              bonaroo,

              exactly WHAT subsidies are Republicans calling for? Perhaps you are imagining things?

              Lowering taxes is NOT A SUBSIDY, it is letting people keep their money. Leasing more offshore tracts for oil drilling IS NOT A SUBSIDY! Allowing energy companies to mine oil shale in the ROCKIES is not a subsidy. But the government paying over $9 for every ride someone takes on a commuter train... ...THAT IS A SUBSIDY. Keeping bus tickets artificially low to encourage ridership... ...THAT IS A SUBSIDY. Spending billions per miles to build subways that almost NO ONE will ride, with gas tax money paid by CAR DRIVERS... ...THAT IS A SUBSIDY!

              You seem to be confused about just what is and is NOT a subsidy, and if you think the Iraq War is about SUBSIDIZING OIL, then you are NUTS! How you arrive at that logic, with gas prices approaching $5 a gallon, I'll NEVER KNOW, and neither will you, because it is utterly irrational.

              Reply
          • 0%

            mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

            "n case you haven't noticed, oil companies - like any other company - are in the business of making profits."

            --Which is exactly why allowing them more drilling rights won't guarantee Americans price relief at the pump. Their shareholders will always come first.

            Reply

            4 Replies

            • 0%

              saintetienne5 months, 1 week ago

              ....and THAT'S where you lose, mesodud (well, there... and in life... and in school... and on the playground when you were a kid... and at the Senior prom...). For if you have no stocks, pensions, IRA accounts or even a 401k plan (and I'm assuming a nincompoop like you does not, since Libs ABHOR evil money) then you're not an oil shareholder, and are missing out on oil company profits that could be profiting you, yes YOU, mesodud. YOU, who probably works for some non-profit save-the-trees organization in Oregon, and wouldn't know what a portfolio was if it was dropped on your head by a spotted owl.

              Reply

              3 Replies

              • 0%

                mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                my stockbroker might differ with you... ;-P

                Reply
              • 0%

                dunkirk5 months, 1 week ago

                ROFLMAO, so they made record profits yet again, like to tell us all what the dividend was on the stock? vs the price? Seems "sharing" those windfall profits isnt what the oil companies do but then again they do have people like you who they toss a crumb too nad your more then willing to jump thru hoops over it. ROFLMAO.

                Reply
              • 0%

                Tangent0015 months, 1 week ago

                So you admit opening ANWR is about increasing oil company profits NOT lowering gas prices like McCain and his ilk are saying.

                Seems these folks are using the gas prices as a tactic to increase their own profitability. You want ANWR and the coasts opened so your stocks will go up, yes? You don't really give a rat's a$$ about gas prices for the average consumer (you know, the ones without stock portfolios).

                Hey, that's Capitalism. Just don't try to paint this push to drill as anything other than an oil grab. Not saying you have, mind you, but some people certainly are, including McCain and Bush.

                Reply
          • 0%

            pongping5 months, 1 week ago

            So if they're drilling on guvment land and making money, do I as a citizen owner of that land get a royalty check? Serious question.

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • lovermanComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

              • 0%

                Tangent0015 months, 1 week ago

                It would also severely decrease tourism in the area and damage the regional fishing industry. But, of course, local sustainability must be sacrificed at the altar of cow-towing to the multi-nationals.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • lovermanComment removed: User banned.
      • 0%

        mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

        " I even have a few friends who are looking for work, but aren't all that concerned, because they have money saved up like any responsible person should."

        --Ahh...You mean "responsible" like Bear Stearns and Enron were. Gotcha. Anyway, I'm just going by the steady stream of panic-stricken Republicans I see on C-SPAN every morning wailing and barking about how drilling is the solution. You people know full well drilling ain't gonna bring gas prices down for YEARS and, like the article says, it's pennies we're talking about. Face it, santa, $4 gas will be Bush's legacy and the Republican party's epitaph. ;-(

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          saintetienne5 months, 1 week ago

          "Face it, santa, $4 gas will be Bush's legacy and the Republican party's epitaph."

          Well if you've listened to what Obomb-out is going to do if he gets in office, $4 gas is going to be a bargain. You'll be crying your little wuss eyes out, wishing gas could be $4 again. With the taxes, regulations and restrictions he's going to place on the oil companies, I predict gas in the U.S. will surpass the $11 per gallon they're already paying in Europe.

          Get a bus ticket and a seat cushion for your fat ass, mesodud. YOU'LL be joining the rest of us on the bus real soon....

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

            "Well if you've listened to what Obomb-out is going to do if he gets in office, $4 gas is going to be a bargain. "

            --Ok, saint. Please don't waste your time trying to threaten or scare me with your political predictions. LOL Not after what America has been through the last 8 years. You tried the same scare tactics in '06 right before Republicans got smacked down by p'od Americans at the ballot box. Judging from the last few special elections we've had, I'd say the bloodbath will be even worse for the GOP come November.

            "Get a bus ticket and a seat cushion for your fat ass, mesodud. YOU'LL be joining the rest of us on the bus real soon...."

            --Actually, my car stays parked about 80% of the year anyway so I'm not stinging like many others are. And even though DC has decent public transportation, I actually can't remember when I was last on bus or metro. I prefer to bike or walk most of the time. But thanks for the warning, anyway. ;-P

            Reply
          • 0%

            dunkirk5 months, 1 week ago

            WOW Saint and just up above you were talking about all the profits the oil companies were sharing with you. I would have thought that made you drive your SUV down the driveway to get hte paper you were so flush with cash from the booming economy. Oh yeah I kleep forgetting the boom you hear from teh economy is the shuttering of windows and the knocking down of manufacturing facilities across the country.

            Reply
      • 0%

        star535 months, 1 week ago

        the dem are cause of the high gas prices- drill now and it will NOT take 5 or 10 yrs to get the oil here.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          dunkirk5 months, 1 week ago

          Really? SO tell us about the oil from Prudhoe? How liong did it take and why dnt we increase our prodictiuon there? Enquiring minds want to know.

          Reply
    • 0%

      Klarissa5 months, 1 week ago

      In a new ad, Obama says, "I don't take money from oil companies."

      Technically, that's true, since a law that has been on the books for more than a century prohibits corporations from giving money directly to any federal candidate. But that doesn't distinguish Obama from his rivals in the race.

      We find the statement misleading:

      * Obama has accepted more than $213,000 from individuals who work for companies in the oil and gas industry and their spouses.

      * Two of Obama's bundlers are top executives at oil companies and are listed on his Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the presidential hopeful.

      Obama: I don't take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won't let them block change anymore.

      Reply

      6 Replies

      • 0%

        Klarissa5 months, 1 week ago

        It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.

        Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Klarissa5 months, 1 week ago

          In addition, two oil industry executives are bundling money for Obama â;; drumming up contributions from individuals and turning them over to the campaign. George Kaiser, the chairman of Oklahoma-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co., ranks 68th on the Forbes list of world billionaires. He's listed on Obama's Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the candidate. Robert Cavnar is president and CEO of Milagro Exploration LLC, an oil exploration and production company. He's named as a bundler in the same category as Kaiser.

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            Klarissa5 months, 1 week ago

            We're not making any judgments about whether Obama is influenced by campaign contributions. In fact, we'd note that he singles out ExxonMobil in this ad, even though he's received more than $30,850 from individuals who work for the company. But we do think that in theory, contributions that come in volume from oil industry executives, or are bundled by them, can be every bit as influential as PAC contributions, if not more so.

            So who is going to favor the oil companies???

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
            • 0%

              dunkirk5 months, 1 week ago

              Bush and the Republicans pretty much. After all he did allow them to write our countries energy policies which encouragfe increased consumption of a non-renewable resource.

              Reply
      • 0%

        bonaroo5 months, 1 week ago

        Klarissa

        * Obama has accepted more than $213,000 from individuals who work for companies in the oil and gas industry and their spouses.

        Even Oil company employees must see how much better Obama is than McCain. I don't see any reason to disqualify their vote, Do YOU?

        * Two of Obama's bundlers are top executives at oil companies and are listed on his Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the presidential hopeful.

        Uhh so what. Obama is able to draw talent from every economic sector. Are you saying that the Republicans should own these people too.

        Reply
    • 0%

      svensun5 months, 1 week ago

      meso,

      Do you mean 'Americans will remember' which political party filibustered EVERY SINGLE ENERGY BILL INTRODUCED BY THE PRESIDENT SINCE 2001?

      You are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

      Do you really think it is desperation that is leading the GOP to call for an end to the drilling moratorium in the USA, the THIRD LARGEST oil producing nation in the world?

      Could it be, perhaps, GOOD POLICY?

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%

        mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

        "Do you mean 'Americans will remember' which political party filibustered EVERY SINGLE ENERGY BILL INTRODUCED BY THE PRESIDENT SINCE 2001?"

        --Sven, you're counting on people to be stupid but Americans woke up in '06. Why won't you? And you need to do your homework about your own party more often before commenting (especially given that Republicans broke the all time record for filibusters during a Congressional session this past year). Americans know how Congress works and they know that two greasy oil men (who campaigned on the promise that their experience and influence in the industry would benefit Americans) haven't done ONE THING meaningful to address high oil prices (from which THEY are benefitting). Finally, Americans will never forget the many issues on which Bush and/or the GOP DEFIED the majority public opinion (SS reform, stem cell funding, Schiavo, SCHIP, to name a handful). Bottom line: You people are goin' DOWN. ;-(

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          svensun5 months, 1 week ago

          meso,

          you are resorting to political rhetoric, using inflammatory and degrading language, rather than facts. You expect to 'wake me up' with that sort of stuff? You know better than that!

          You say Americans know how Congress works; well, then why don't YOU know how Congress works?

          You know very well that increased drilling on federal lands, including ANWR, has been a hot political topic since 1995, and especially since 2001, and people KNOW who has favored drilling, and who has not. Too bad for McCain that he has been on YOUR side for most of that time. It costs him credibility on the issue.

          You claim that GOP positions are so unpopular, but if that is so, then why were the new Democrats who won in 2006 mostly those who AGREE with the GOP on most of those issues? I think you'll find that most of the new incoming Dem Congressmen in 2006 were rather conservative on most issues.

          Reply
    • 0%

      FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

      "Or maybe it's more that cons just have impaired listening and critical thinking skills"

      Oh...Just cons use oil ? Boy, AL Gore sure uses a lot of oil...Do you think he'll listen to your message of "conservation"? LMAO !!!

      BTW, check this link out and maybe you'll shut your pie-hole...It appears Bush is the more eco-friendly politician...Gore and you are friggin hypcrits and idiots...

      http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

      Reply
  • 0%

    Klarissa5 months, 1 week ago

    of course not - it takes several years before the drilling is on line and producing. We have to start somewhere sometime.

    Reply

    39 Replies

    • 0%

      bigG5 months, 1 week ago

      I am in the business and I can guarantee you that all of the "easy to get" oil is long gone in the U.S. We are drilling and producing in deepwater GOM and there are large reserves there, but getting them to market will take years. All of the Einsteins I read on here that whine about not drilling in ANWAR need to realize this - it is real remote and will take a lot of infrastructure just to get rigs there to drill exploratory wells. That won't be cheap, neither will producing the oil and transporting it assuming it is even economically viable(there may be a lot less oil there than some people hope). The oil shale situation is the same - mountains literally will have to be moved to recover this "synthetic" oil unless an "in situ" process can be developed that will assure an economically viable recovery rate without damaging the surface water and water table.

      If people want cheaper oil the answer is simple - quit using so much.

      Reply

      38 Replies

      • 0%

        nightschase5 months, 1 week ago

        Couldn't have said it better :)

        Reply
      • 0%

        svensun5 months, 1 week ago

        bigG,

        if that oil is not economically viable, then it won't be drilled, that's obvious. So, what's your worry? Are you saying it will cost $125 per barrel to retrieve these new sources of oil? Of course not, and you know better.

        What's the matter? Don't you believe in competition? If someone can extract that oil, and make a profit at less than $125 per barrel, they'll do it, and we'll all be better off.

        And if people want cheaper oil, the SIMPLER answer is to get the government to stop killing oil's chief competitors: nuclear power and new hydroelectric projects.

        Reply

        11 Replies

        • 0%

          bigG5 months, 1 week ago

          "if that oil is not economically viable, then it won't be drilled, that's obvious. So, what's your worry? Are you saying it will cost $125 per barrel to retrieve these new sources of oil?"

          First, I am not "worried" about anything. My point is that all new oil from the U.S. will be increasingly more expensive to produce - the prevailing price of oil will determine which, if any, projects will be built. They don't have unlimited resources(money and people, etc.) to develop the marginal projects at the same time.

          I love competition, and if you think that a company is going to take the risk associated to make a potentially marginal return on investment, you are wrong. A stronger U.S. Dollar( like several years ago) will lower the price significantly by itself.( note the trend and do the math)

          http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=1... (contd.)

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

            "First, I am not "worried" about anything. My point is that all new oil from the U.S. will be increasingly more expensive to produce - the prevailing price of oil will determine which, if any, projects will be built."

            --I'm told I'm "worried" or "afraid" a lot on this issue (even though it's affected me far less significantly than many I know). This I find comical since I'm being assaulted daily in the media by whining and hand-wringing from those who live in or represent States and regions with *no* alternatives to automobile transit (and I think we know where most of those are).

            Reply
        • 0%

          bigG5 months, 1 week ago

          I also believe we need to develop nuclear plants as they are much safer than thirty years ago. Hydroelectric plants are another alternative, but less so unless you really want Lake Iowa to be permanent. There is a bigger limit to those.

          Again, if people want cheaper oil in the short term - quit using so much. Go buy a car that gets 30 plus mpg like we did in the seventies.

          Reply

          8 Replies

          • 0%

            mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

            "I also believe we need to develop nuclear plants as they are much safer than thirty years ago."

            --I agree with you to a point. Under the right party and with conscientious quality and safety controls, I think more nuclear power would be very good. The problem is that I absolutely DO NOT trust Republicans to do what's right for the environment rather than what's expedient for corporations. Just look at this current administration and you KNOW they'd be cutting corners in some way that could endanger the public. That is my number one concern about nuke power.

            "Again, if people want cheaper oil in the short term - quit using so much. Go buy a car that gets 30 plus mpg like we did in the seventies."

            --Has this President or Republican Congress even ONCE emphasized conservation? This is the first President to ever award war time tax cuts ( and while fighting TWO wars!). Come on now... ;-(

            Reply

            7 Replies

            • 0%

              FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

              --I agree with you to a point. Under the right party and with conscientious quality and safety controls, I think more nuclear power would be very good. The problem is that I absolutely DO NOT trust Republicans to do what's right for the environment...

              Mesodufus,

              Did you know that Republicans we're actually the party of the enviroment BEFORE the dumba$$ Dems stole it from us ? Did you ? Rebubs were WAYYYYYY more eco-friendly than the Dems at one time, but we slowly got away from talking about it and the Dems started talking about it ALL the time...But it didn't mean that the Repubs were anti-enviroment...That is a huge misperception and short-insight on your part...

              And I thought you were smart?

              not really... ; )

              Reply

              3 Replies

              • 0%

                mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                "But it didn't mean that the Repubs were anti-enviroment...That is a huge misperception and short-insight on your part..."

                --I'm sorry your party has lost its way and sorrier still that your decision making skills are crude. All we have to do is look at what Bush and the GOP have done to destroy government regulatory agencies in the quest to put corporations first. Bush gutted FEMA (and thousands have died as a result), bridges have plummeted to the ground killing Americans, food safety and consumer product safety is in the toilet and I here in DC where I live our water supply is laced with lead and prescription drugs. I simply don't understand how the very same people who are so terrified of leaving Iraq for fear of what terrorists will do to us are perfectly willing to support those who legislate in ways that threaten our planet. I don't think cons have much in the way of common sense. Actually, I know it. ;-(

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  svensun5 months, 1 week ago

                  meso,

                  I am sorry to hear about your water supply problems, but you could please tell me when the last time was that REPUBLICANS controlled the DC City Government? And how long has it been since Republicans controlled the Maryland State House, and had a governor that lasted more than one or two terms?

                  Do you really believe Republicans are to blame for your drinking water problems? In my state, municipalities are responsible for drinking water and sewage, not the state or the feds.

                  Reply
              • 0%

                dunkirk5 months, 1 week ago

                "Did you know that Republicans we're actually the party of the enviroment BEFORE the dumba$$ Dems stole it from us ? "

                ROFLMAO, they stole it from you? And by them stealing it your party couldn't also sponsor the same legislation or be envoronmentally concerned? Seems the only envoironmental cincern your party sponsors are intiatives that are in their own backyard, we can clear cut forests to prevent forest fires just not these ones near where I live. You make less and less sense every time you post. We cant be envornmentally concious since the Dems are?

                Reply
            • 0%

              bigG5 months, 1 week ago

              "Has this President or Republican Congress even ONCE emphasized conservation? This is the first President to ever award war time tax cuts ( and while fighting TWO wars!). Come on now... ;-("

              Can't argue with that, but I don't need a politician to emphasize conservation for me to conserve on my own. I am doing my part.

              Reply

              2 Replies

              • 0%

                mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                So do I and I know I could do a lot more. Just saying that with the right leadership, I think we could do a lot more to encourage conservation and discourage wasteful or excessive use.

                Reply

                1 Reply

                • 0%

                  svensun5 months, 1 week ago

                  meso, there is already a mechanism to 'discourage wasteful or excessive use'; it's called CAPITALISM. That means, if you want to waste or use something excessively, you have to pay for it.

                  You want the government to regulate what you use, and how much you use?

                  Does that include EVERYTHING you use? Food? Television viewing? Time on the internet? Medical care? Schooling? Books? Newspapers? Magazines? Guns? Vacations? Travelling?

                  Reply
      • 0%

        mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

        "All of the Einsteins I read on here that whine about not drilling in ANWAR need to realize this - it is real remote and will take a lot of infrastructure just to get rigs there to drill exploratory wells. "

        --Isn't it remarkable how on issue after issue, neocons somehow conclude that *they* are bettter educated or qualified than top experts who have devoted most of their adult lives to research in their given field? They tell themselves that if they read it on the internet or heard it from their chosen source, then it is definitively the truth. Amazing. Con arrogance leaves me quite breathless sometimes.

        Reply

        24 Replies

        • 0%

          FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

          "--Isn't it remarkable how on issue after issue, neocons somehow conclude that *they* are bettter educated or qualified than top experts who have devoted most of their adult lives to research in their given field? They tell themselves that if they read it on the internet or heard it from their chosen source, then it is definitively the truth. Amazing. Con arrogance leaves me quite breathless sometimes"

          Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you...Just because you read something from a liberal source, It's Gospel to you...LMAO !!! Anyway, speaking of Einstein's...What is you short-term fix to solving the problem other than not driving, becoming a hermit, turning your air up to 90 and walking 5 miles to the grocery store to get already expensive groceries? You're short-sightedness is quite evident...I don't think there is any arguement that we need alternative sources of energy, but telling people to simply stop using gas or oil is ludicrious and retarded...

          Reply

          23 Replies

          • 0%

            FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

            We have got to find a way to provide temporary relief, much like a band-aid, where we can have some time to get other sources of energy up and running because as you and other libs have stated, it's going to take many years to get these things mass-produced to handle America's energy demands, but let's be real...We're still going to need oil...Unfortunately our politicians and enviromenatlist have made sure of that...

            Telling America to simply "stop using oil" is about as good as telling them "just say NO to drugs"...We all saw how THAT program worked...You see, mesodufus...Liberals are all friggin' talkers...They're good at talking about stuff, but no action...We need a plan that makes sense and drilling here in America and tapping into our own resources makes sense, not to mention the many other jobs that will be created when we do open up drilling here in America....Does that help the economy ? Of course it does...

            Your solution is NO solution....

            Reply

            22 Replies

            • 0%

              FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

              As a caveat, mesodufus...

              How do you help those people who have to commute into work because they couldn't afford to live IN the city to take advantage of some of the urban transit systems or cycling or whatever ? Sure, you have a nice cozy little place close to work where you can easily do that but what about the rest of America...What about rural America, Mesodufus? What can you offer them other then "We need to cut back on oil usage..." Blah-Blah-Blah....You see...This clearly proves to me and others that liberals are truly about themselves...As long as THEY are comforable, then to hell with everybody else....Some people don't or can't work out of their home to conserve fuel and need other options...Which at this time you're not able to offer...

              And I thought you libs care about everybody (just not the rich, I guess)?....Even though, you guys continue to live like kings.

              Reply

              3 Replies

              • 0%

                mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                "And I thought you libs care about everybody (just not the rich, I guess)?....Even though, you guys continue to live like kings."

                --See...*This* is what I'm talking about. I don't know if you're joking but this is the sort of statement which makes you appear to be unbelievably stupid. Depending on which thread I'm in, I'm accused of being on welfare or being a "SF liberal." Cons need to stop the madness. ;-(

                Reply

                2 Replies

                • 0%

                  FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

                  Cons need to stop the madness. ;-(

                  And liberals need to stop with the appeasement tactics and "burying their head in the sand" attitude about our energy needs...

                  It's a problem, which the "cons" have the solutions and the liberals b-tch and moan about the solutions, further preventing anything from getting done...It will never get done because liberals and Democraps are the party of "no-nothings" and "slogans", empty rhetoric and promises that yield no solutions, but continue to throw our country into the pits of hell...All their worried about is "big oil" making a profit, but don't look at politicians getting 18.4% off the top of every gallon gas which produce nothing or manufacture anything...Oil companies manufacture and produce a product that American's need and because they are doing well, characters like Meso-dufus make them out to be the bad guy...Marxism is alive and well...

                  Reply

                  1 Reply

                  • 0%

                    mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                    "It's a problem, which the "cons" have the solutions and the liberals b-tch and moan about the solutions, further preventing anything from getting done..."

                    --FSU, what kind of alternate reality are you living in, dude?! Republicans are no longer running the country BECAUSE OF cons. After Bush and the GOP spent 6 years ignoring the public's wishes, wasting our time and ruining the country, your party lost the public's confidence AND the majority. You LOST. YOUR "solutions" and YOUR slogans ("appeasement" "retreat and surrender" ring a bell?) and they threw the GOP out.

                    The reason Bush and current Congress's approval ratings are so low is because the GOP unleashed a record number of filibusters, further p!ssing off Americans. That's why Republicans lost recent special elections, it's why they're all jumping ship and it's why you're going to lose many, MANY more seats come November. For the love of God, put down the koolaid, man. ;-(

                    Reply
            • 0%

              mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

              "Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you...Just because you read something from a liberal source, It's Gospel to you...LMAO !!! "

              --Of *course* you think it's "funny." Oh what fun it is, when, after presented with indisputable facts that don't server your interests, you can blink your eyes or wrinkle your nose and, presto! Suddenly, it's a "liberal source" and you can tell yourself that 1 1 actually *doesn't* = 2, right? ;-P Cons wave their warped tin foil wands and the entire international community is "liberal" (they disagree with Bush, so they must be, right?). And the thousands of scientists who know we're destroying the planet from all over the world? They're all "liberals" too. Gotta be...On the other hand, it's surprisingly inconceivable to cons that scientists funded by obscenely wealthy oil barons might have *their* reasons for muddying the waters on the debate. Noooo...Couldn't possibly be. ;-P

              Reply
            • 0%

              mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

              "We have got to find a way to provide temporary relief, much like a band-aid, where we can have some time to get other sources of energy up and running..."

              --We're working on it but it's an uphill battle when your President and VP are earning megabucks for every second they do absolutely nothing and when they actively work for the benefit of the oil companies over concerns of the citizenry. The thing is, cons recoil in horror whenever the idea of conservation is mentioned and as long as you're so resistant to the idea, there will be continued gridlock and more profits for ExxonMobil, Bush and Cheney. ;-(

              Reply
            • 0%

              mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

              "Telling America to simply "stop using oil" is about as good as telling them "just say NO to drugs"...We all saw how THAT program worked..."

              --Or maybe it's more that cons just have impaired listening and critical thinking skills. You keep trotting out this crap from idiot right wing shout personalities who bark and hiss endlesslessly about Al Gore wanting us to go back to the stone age while he burns all the lights in his house 24/7, blah blah blah and you guys SUCK all this garbage in like kids overeating junk at a county fair. You should be smarter than that. No one is proposing draconian conservation measures. Obliging yourself to turn off the faucet while you brush your teeth is not a freaking attack on your Constitutional rights. Get serious. LOL

              Reply

              15 Replies

              • 0%

                FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

                mesodufus..

                What does turning off the water have to do with using more oil ? Stick to topic, McFly....

                All I'm saying is that you are truly naive if you really believe people are going to stop using oil overnight....Fancy slogans like "Change" and "Use less oil" means nothing to the American people because they're just words...

                I have asked you now a few times to give us your plan for solving the high energy costs here in America and you've conveniently evaded the questions now a couple hundred times...It's easy for you to sit in your nice convenient, close-to-work location and talk about conserving oil, when you don't really have to use much yourself...Much like it's easy for Al Gore to concoct a story about Global Warming and the need to reduce fuel emissions while flying around the planet in his lear jet and building a mansion the size of Kansas, burning how many gobs of oil...You see, you libs are hypocrits...

                Reply

                13 Replies

                • 0%

                  FSU92grad5 months, 1 week ago

                  As long as YOU'RE cozy and gas prices are really effecting you, you talk a lot of smack about "conservation" but in reality it only applies to OTHER people....Because YOU really don't have a problem with it...

                  What an idiot...

                  Reply
                • 0%

                  mesodude5 months, 1 week ago

                  "What does turning off the water have to do with using more oil ? Stick to topic, McFly...."

                  --Gee, Biff...I realize the con's brain is prone to rigid and simplistic thought patterns but you people have a serious mental block when it comes to the issue of conservation. It's like that little hamster at the wheel just plunges into a coma.