Skip to comments.Reid rejects Bush call to lift drilling moratorium (Rats want higher gas prices!)
Posted on 07/14/2008 2:23:41 PM PDT by tobyhill
WASHINGTON, July 14 (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, on Monday rejected a call by U.S. President George W. Bush to lift a moratorium on offshore oil drilling.
Bush announced on Monday that he lifted the executive branch's restriction on offshore exploration, saying only Congress stood in the way of opening up America's untapped oil riches.
(Excerpt) Read more at uk.reuters.com ...
“Our guys need to be hammering the Dems with this. As often as they can get in front of a camera or mic!”
Wake me when the cowardly pussies in the Republican party wake up. The “compassionate conservatism” of the Bushes and others is, and has been a politically damaging soporific.
Drudge has this brainless headline: “OIL PLUNGES BELOW $139...”. Relatively large drop, but a bit over dramatic.
Everyone but them to walk. No drilling for oil, no nuclear plants, no coal mining, no, no, no. The party of no, if it means you can make it on your own without their 'help'.
If they would just GET OUT OF THE WAY no one would need their 'help'. They are standing in the way of PROGRESS which is their intention to keep people dependent on them!
Here’s a form. Give Harry Hell.
I take it you're not a Republican.
When the Republican party returns to its conservative roots, I will be comfortable with calling myself a “Republican” again.
I live in NorCal and always liked the look of high-tech wind farms on the green hills. However, it you look at how much power they actually generate per acre is it shockingly pathetic. They are also moving machines, subject to heavy weather, sun, vibration and wear and are dangerous and costly to service, making them quite expensive overall.
Worst of all, they tend to kill birds. This means that most of the enviro lobby hates them.
Enviros hate wind and nukes. That leaves solar, and they would oppose turning over significant desert land to that also. This pretty much leaves tiny solar panels on some buildings and conservation as the only solution.
Trust me, we will never “conserve our way” out of this crisis, that is for certain. Most enviro thinking is “feel-good” gestures that accomplish very little.
I’ve used a bit of guerilla tech to cut my personal usage by a third, but it is still 360 kwhrs per month. That is a lot of windmill time.
We’re not that stupid but Markey is!!!!!!
All of these Demagogues are immensely stupid and vicious, no matter what their degrees may say. They keep wanting shove all kinds of b.s. down our throats and they demand that we like it and ask for more.
Damn! You made me dust off my copy and reread the ending!
How frightening and to think it damn near happened on 9-11 and still could, though now it may not really be a tragedy in today's political winds. It would be a shame to lose such a historic building.
I have used this link to send in my name on a petition to start drilling now. If it is something that suits you please sign it and keep it going so that we can be counted.
I must say I'm with Eyeguy.
Though I do pretty much find your last sentence spot on. I must disagree with the "oil lease" premise of your post.
Those so called oil leases are in fact leases to EXPLORE for oil that might be there, not to extract known reserves. Understanding the first part enlightens us even more when we know that over 80% of those so-called oil leases have already been explored and found wanting.
No one in the capital market place wants higher costs, that is just stupid and leads to bankruptcy. Only socialists WANT higher costs, because it drives the economy into recession, at worst, depression and makes ripe conditions for their marxist revolution.
God bless her soul.
Two things I would like to see tried:
1) Voluntary termination (or legislation permitting this) of unusable but explored land leases by the oil companies (with return of proportional advance lease payments, in exchange for equivalent Anwar or other high probability acres.
2) Gov of Alaska to mobilize the Alaska National Guard to seize ANWAR land (or the proposed oil site) from the feds with immediate lease offers for oil exploration, forcing a showdown over the drilling issue. Lets see the dems TRY to force bush to try to take it back... hehe.
What do you think?
I think those are a couple good ideas but unfortunately we have “fearless leaders” that can’t see good ideas beyond their own political biases.
Oil Wells - Uncap and Pump!
There are capped wells all over Southern California, Texas and possibly many other states. They are ensnared in red tape by people who want us to walk but they won’t. Write your reps and tell them to Uncap and Pump.
McVain has no problem offending conservatives.
I came here hoping to see a topic on global warming but this is the closest I can find to the subject to post this. My husband and I finally forced ourselves to watch Al Gore’s “inconvenient truth” and we got to a point that my husband said “stop” and he stopped the movie. He went and got a pen and paper and started writing down and this is what he wrote. I just had to share this because I want to find out if this particular point has been brought up before among conservatives to counter this hoax. We watched the movie “the Great global warming swindle” and I did not see this point addressed. Here it is below.
Al Gore references a set of line charts which depict global temperature(Blue) and global CO2 levels (red) one above another for the past 650,000 years. His first point is that they parallel closely thereby showing the direct relation between them. His next point is a relationship shown during the recent (last ice age until present day) portion of the chart. He points to the high peak at the end of the temperature line and says it would indicate a pleasant day. He then points to the low point in temperature and say this would be a place where you would have a mile of Ice over your head. At this point he moves up to the CO2 line and the chart animates forward in time to the present day. The CO2 for present day is a nearly vertical line with about double the length of the CO2 change shown from mile of ice to pleasant day. Here is where the problem arises. If I am to believe Als first assertion that the CO2 and temp are directly related (and the lines do indeed show almost identical changes in direction and magnitude), and I ascribe a reasonable temperature difference to the unit Mile of Ice to Pleasant day like 80 degrees F, then the present day temp For places like Detroit and Cleveland would have to be 240 degrees F (80 + 2 X 80). Al then goes on to show the predictions for the next 50 years on the CO2 line, about another 2 of my units. This would mean that the corresponding temperature would have to be 400 degrees (240 +2 X 80).
There a couple of inconvenient (for poor Al) truths left out in the movie at this point. 1. The temperature scale is never continued to present day because it would have shown a gross flattening not corresponding to the CO2 line (Weather channel showing significantly below 240 this time of year). And 2. Since the graph is on the 650,000 year scale it fails to show the 100-200 year nuance that temperature precedes CO2 levels indicating increased CO2 is a result not a cause of naturally caused global climate change.