F... gas prices

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I totally agree and have said that I would love for the Republicans to present a bill just for exploration of oil in Anwr and other areas just to make people either vote for or against. This would be perfect timing with the current gas prices.

The Dems just voted one down LAST WEEK.

Idiots. They still claim "but it will take years to develop!"

That's MORE of a reason to start it NOW. If they HAD voted for it during the Clinton years, we'd be using that oil TODAY.

The real reason they won't vote for it because their campaigns are funded by environmentalists who oppose it and will stop writing checks if they do what's right for America.

[Skins fan 44]

[QUOTE=Buster;449559]The Dems just voted one down LAST WEEK.

Idiots. They still claim "but it will take years to develop!"

That's MORE of a reason to start it NOW. If they HAD voted for it during the Clinton years, we'd be using that oil TODAY.

The real reason they won't vote for it because their campaigns are funded by environmentalists who oppose it and will stop writing checks if they do what's right for America.""

I will tell you and everyone now. Any one who votes against drilling in the states will not get my vote. I would think that running against someone voting again on shore drilling would not be too difficult. All one would have to do is run a commercial stating what your opponent has done about high gas prices and what you will do

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

When Democratic politicians opposed to drilling in ANWR make either of the following arguments:

1. It will take years to develop, or
2. all the oil there only represents __% of the world's reserves,

they are not revealing their true motives. They are oppossed to it because environmental groups like the Sierra Club have told them to be against it. The next time Obama says he's going to stand up to special interests, someone should ask him why he's against drilling in Alaska.

David Brooks on Obama and Special Interests: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/op...brooks.html?hp

Really? Look what my friend Google turned up, by THE pro ANWR group no less:

Senator Barack Obama ( Illinois ) – Often cited as one of the top presidential contenders. Barack Obama has an abysmal record on ANWR voting on the Cantwell Amendment in 2005 to lock it up. He has been opposed to exploration and has rallied with Sen. Clinton in that regard numerous times. Barack states, "I strongly reject drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge because it would irreversibly damage a protected national wildlife refuge without creating sufficient oil supplies to meaningfully affect the global market price or have a discernable impact on U.S. energy security.” In his two and a half years in the Senate he has been part of the introduction of over 100 pieces of “green” legislation from promoting ethanol use to increased car mileage. However despite this many in the left see Obama as a moderate as he is caught frequently citing the need for bipartisan support and dialogue on energy issues as the way forward. His support of corn derived ethanol and liquid coal do not win him support in the Green camp either, which when coupled with ANWR proves a weakness. Illinois is, after all, one of the top ethanol states in the nation. Obama has yet to visit ANWR or the Alaskan Arctic. By 2020 Obama hopes 20% of all US energy will come from renewable resources. For more information on Obama's energy platform visit:

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by saden1

Really? Look what my friend Google turned up, by THE pro ANWR group no less:

Nothing in there refutes anything I said. Obama failed to stand up the special interests on ANWR and on ethanol. Using the word "bi-partisan" a lot doesn't make you an environmental "moderate" no matter what the extreme left thinks.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Nothing in there refutes anything I said. Obama failed to stand up the special interests on ANWR and on ethanol. Using the word "bi-partisan" a lot doesn't make you an environmental "moderate" no matter what the extreme left thinks.

First you claim democrats as a whole are not revealing their true motives and then you proceed to call Obama out specifically. What part of the his quote doesn't suggest his "true motive?" Further more, just because you're pro environment doesn't mean policy is being dictated by the Sierra Clubs. They play an advisory role I am sure (it's called listening to scientist and assessment) but ultimately the candidate makes the decision whether you agree with it or not. Lastly, opposition to drilling in ANWR is not limited to one "true motive," one can in fact have a host of motives.

[saden1]

JoeRedskin, I haven't forgotten about you. Sit tight, you'll have thorough response when I manage to get some free time.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by saden1

JoeRedskin, I haven't forgotten about you. Sit tight, you'll have thorough response when I manage to get some free time.

No worries. I assumed as much. You wacko lefty commies always take forever to figure out the intellectual stuff.

[FRPLG]

70, while I agree with soem of what you said just about all of it could apply in a vice versa way to Republicans. it is the folly of our system.

[MTK]

Oil prices continue to soar...

Crude oil sets a new record above $130 a barrel on Wednesday - May. 21, 2008

[HenryGale]

I don't have enought posts to start a thread on this, so maybe someone else can do that, but how f'n dumb is it to propose "suing" OPEC? For those of you who do not know, our wonderful Congress has passed legislation making it possible to sue OPEC with our antitrust laws. Dumb, dumb, and dumber! This was a bi-partisan effort as well, talk about political pandering! OPEC controls roughly 40 % of the world's oil, and they are heavily invested in our oil infrastructure, i.e. refineries. What do you think is going to happen if we sue them? They'll just stop production, refuse to sell to the U.S. or shut down the refineries here. Talk about gas prices skyrocketing, doubling or tripling over night! While armies of lawyers fight that out, the American people would have years of 7$7-8 dollar gas! Remember when those families sued Libya over that airline bombing in Europe? That litigation dragged on for years! I hope Bush is smart enough to veto this piece of crap. Yes, the price of gas is awful, but both political parties put us in this situation, they both share the blame. However, despite the high price, at least gas is available for sale. If anyone is old enough to remember the 70s, then remember that gas was not even available, it was literally rationed out as people waited in gas lines for hours and hours. I'll gladly pay $4/gallon if I can get it now as opposed to reliving the 70s oil embargo.

[Monkeydad]

see Post # 95

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Buster

see Post # 95

For the people who do not want to go thread hunting here is a link to that post and everyone should read to know on of the main causes for high oil prices. To add to that the far left has stopped just about everthing we have tried to pass in the past couple of years for oil exploration, oil refineries, nuclear, natural gas etc... saying they are protecting the enviroment. Newsmax.com - Senate Blocks ANWR Oil Exploration

[dmek25]

buster, did you read that article? John McCain missed the vote, but said he would have voted against it, also. maybe its not just Dem's that have their campaigns funded by environmentalists?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by dmek25

buster, did you read that article? John McCain missed the vote, but said he would have voted against it, also. maybe its not just Dem's that have their campaigns funded by environmentalists?

The article said that a few Rep. voted against some of these Bills which there is a few that are more liberal than conservative. Its like here in Va Dems tend to lean more to the middle than to the left. McCain is clearly not the best choice for the Rep. but thats who we got.

Let me clear up that last statement. I vote most of the time Rep. but on several occasions have felt that the Dem was the better choice and voted for them.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by dmek25

buster, did you read that article? John McCain missed the vote, but said he would have voted against it, also. maybe its not just Dem's that have their campaigns funded by environmentalists?

Off shore drilling voted down today on a party line vote. We better get out there before the Cubans and Chinese.

FOXNews.com - House Subcommittee Rejects Plan to Open U.S. Waters to More Oil Exploration - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum