Posted on 06/19/2008 7:51:34 AM PDT by SmithL
Yeah, I guess we're going to peddle our way out of it, eh?
he could no longer afford the romanticized view that oil should only be pumped from yucky places
I like this line - it captures the childeshness, foolishness, and naivete of liberalism beautifully.
Go figure.
McCain is “leading” by jumping to the front of the parade, but at least he is at the front of the right parade.
I’d like to hear someone ask Obambi if he favors the lowering of our standard of living through high energy prices.
:::::
Like all Marxists, he does not give a damn about America or its people — a waste of time to ask for more lies and hot air. It is all about POWER and his Marxist agenda. He is VERY dangerous and MUST lose in November.
Haven’t you learned? We can’t eat our way out of starvation.
They also justify blockage of new drilling by saying that it will be years before we see any effect. Well, it has been DECADES and NOT drilling has produce exactly NOTHING. All the more reason to start drilling NOW.
By that same reasoning no one should ever plant fruit trees because it would be years until we see any fruit!
Farmer whispers to Obama: We can't grow anything this year.
Obama: We can't, why not?
Farmer: Our fields are under water.
Obama: What about when it dries out?
Farmer: It will be to late to plant.
Obama (back to the crowd): It's a good thing we will have the coming Global Warming Crisis. Your fields should dry out a lot sooner and you farmers will be able to plant year round! We will have change, we will be able to grow the crops needed for biofuel.
PURE B.S. and PURE SATIRE
I am not trying to start a fight here, but does everyone believe that we have an inexhaustible supply of oil from which to draw? I have been reading much lately about the “peak oil” concept and I am curious to hear other opinions. The people who subscribe to this theory are very much set on the imminent collapse of civilization as we know it due to a rapidly diminishing supply of crude oil and a rapidly increasing demand. I personally have little more faith in mankind’s ability to adapt but, hey , who knows. Comments?
Good one.
“We can’t solve hunger by growing food.
We can’t work our way out of poverty.”
And using that Democrat logic, we can’t afford to “invest in education,” because that takes 17 or 18 years.
The guys that aren’t supposed to have a dog in this fight, the independent research firms, are in some cases advising their clients in the O&G downstream business that it’ll never be better than now (actually a year and 1/2 ago) to sell your business. These are not stupid people.
I kidded her about him looking like her horse. She looked genuinely hurt and said "Please, sir, don't insult my horse."
In 1995, Thirty-Eight Senate Democrats, Including Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV), John Kerry (D-MA) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) All Voted To Prohibit Drilling In ANWR.
The motion to allow drilling in ANWR was agreed to by a vote of 56-44.
Republicans voted 48-6 for drilling
8 Democrats voted for drilling.
38 Democrats voted against drilling.
The measure passed the House and was vetoed President Clinton who stated:
“Today, I am vetoing this Republican budget because it would break those commitments and would lead us toward weakness and division when we must move toward strength and unity.”
President Clinton: “This budget would give oil companies the right to drill in the last unspoiled arctic wilderness in Alaska.”
That veto is costing the United States of America $50 billion a year to replace the 1,000,000 barrels a day that we would have been getting from ANWR with an equivalent amount from foreign sources.
You’re getting tripped up by the word “inexhaustible.” It’s a ridiculous word, it means nothing, and it has no practical value in intelligent conversation on concrete issues.
It should, therefore, be no surprise that those who advocate “Utopianism” — another equally valueless word — always trot it out during serious discourse on energy policy.
My advice? Treat people who drop words like “inexhaustible” and “Utopianism” as you would a child. In a way, they are.
What I don’t understand is how the Democrats fail to see how much they are risking with their irrational stance on energy. Americans are getting HOT, and I don’t mean “climate change”, and there is rapidly approaching a day of reckoning. We all seem to think that we’re special in America, that rebellion doesn’t occur, that Americans can’t get angry enough to fight back—literally. WRONG. There is a powderkeg that grows daily and I think you’re likely to see it blow-up when Americans have had enough. It’s not going to be pretty, either, and the Democrats and other obstructionists to freedom will pay a dear, dear price for their foolishness.
Well, not quite ineluctable: A rebellion — maybe not a physical one but certainly a philosophical one — really does need to take place to thwart this pernicious slide.
And where do philosophical rebellions begin? In 2008, on forums like this.
If you consider that there are vast fields under ANWR, the northern plains states, and off-shore, then there isn't really a "peak" is there? Also, I have read reports on some oil fields thought to be tapped out all of the sudden filling again.
I’ve read several stories in which drained fields were revisited and for unexplained reasons have started to refill. It may be that fossil fuel doesn’t come from fossils.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.