Saturday, August 21, 2010

Do you buy the Democrats arguement that we shouldn't drill for oil because it wouldn't affect prices at the

pump for years?


How stupid can these people be?


Have they ever heard about thinking of the future?


If they hadn't stopped the drilling over the past 30 years we wouldn't be in this position todayDo you buy the Democrats arguement that we shouldn't drill for oil because it wouldn't affect prices at the
That's just the usual democrat logic for you


it just doesn't make any sense at all


the dems are always going after the dumb people's votes


remember Hillary and her contingent of dummiesDo you buy the Democrats arguement that we shouldn't drill for oil because it wouldn't affect prices at the
it's just so typical of an answer from the political party that gains it's power through others weakness.





The reality is, the moment Congress announces Drilling offshore and ANWR for that matter prices at the pump will reflect it immediately. (because of speculative pricing).





It never ceases to amaze me when the Dems or Liberals are the first to complain about a problem or issue, but the moment you offer a solution, they are the first to say that it won't work.
'....stopped the drilling over the past 30 years........'? Where have you been living? Under what rock? Drilling and exploration for oil and gas has never stopped? Have there been slow times and crazy times? Yes. But there is a ton of drilling going on in the US, has been for 40+ years, and that has expanded tremendously in the past 2 years. Do you honestly think that a company drills for oil one day, that same oil is sent to the refinery the next day, and the day after that it's in the pump ready for you to consume? If you do then you are the one who should be asking yourself just how stupid are you.
How about their argument that we should stop being so addicted to oil and actually start implementing alternative, clean and renewable energy sources?





How stupid can cons be? Have they ever thought about the future or do they just want to tie our hands even more to big oil? Why do cons want the oil companies to have all of the 100 year leases to all of our natural resources and a monopoly with little to no competition? Are they truly sheeple like that?
Have you ever seen all the oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico? Do you think they just grew off the ocean floor? Did you know there are still millions of acres under lease by the oil companies in the gulf yet to be drilled? Before you try shoving your foot into others mouths, you need to take it out of your own first. I'm going to guess you weren't around in 1973 when OPEC squeezed our gonads and we still did absolutely nothing. Like you, I do indeed wonder how stupid some people can be.
No, I do not accept it. It is a hollow, simple-minded argument.





It is like saying, ';I shouldn't take the first step to walk down the street, because it will take me a hundred steps to reach the end of the block. It would be better if I just sat here on the porch.';
Nope, because that isn't the real issue. The real issue should encompass total energy independence from outside sources and using every resource that we have available including alternative energy such as nuclear power plants.





The dems are slicing their own throats by fighting this, let 'em.
Excuse me but Ronald Reagan put the moritorium on off shore drilling and George H W Bush renewed it !!


Two arch conservatives, but go ahead, blame the liberals,


it is what you people do best !!





Keith Olbermann delivered a special report Wednesday on the ';Enron loophole'; -- a regulatory gap that is the single greatest cause of out-of-control gasoline prices -- and how McCain's leading advisors created that loophole and continue to defend it.


People who deal in oil routinely use ';futures'; -- agreements in advance on prices and delivery dates -- to deal with fluctuations in the market. However, deregulation has allowed commodity speculators to take over this system of futures and use it for their own profit, running up the price of oil in a speculative bubble.





According to Olbermann, the story of $4 a gallon gas begins during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, when former Enron CEO Ken Lay started speculating on energy futures. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) gave Enron free rein, and when Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, CFTC Chairwoman Wendy Gramm moved to lock in the commission's informal position on Enron as official policy. Gramm then joined Enron's board of directors, earning more than $900,000 over the next decade.





In December 2000, during the chaos following the presidential election, Enron got a law passed containing an amendment known as the ';Enron loophole,'; deregulating not just single trades but entire markets. This made it possible for Enron to artificially create the California energy crisis -- and left Enron employees chortling over how they had ****** over ';Grandma Millie.';





The Enron loophole applied not just to electricity, but to all energy sources, which is why speculators have now been able to take over the oil market. Two weeks ago, the Senate Commerce Committee heard testimony from a former CFTC director that ';the speculators are not just placing bets in these futures markets, they're saying, 'Gosh, I can control the price of heating oil.' ... Morgan Stanley is the biggest heating oil owner in New England.';





If the Enron loophole is removed, said this director, ';you get at least a 25% drop in the cost of oil ... some people estimate 50%.';





John McCain voted to close the Enron loophole in 2002 and 2003, saying at the time that ';we're all tainted'; by Enron's money. But, notes Olbermann, ';for most of this campaign, McCain has offered explanations other than the influence of speculators, and remedies other than regulation.'; If the Enron loophole is not closed, even alternative energy sources will do little to reduce prices, because speculators will be able to immediately take those over as well.





';John McCain doesn't talk about the Enron loophole any more,'; reports Olbermann. ';What changed? Since 2006, John McCain's top economic advisor has been former Texas Senator Phil Gramm, husband of the former CFTC head who then joined Enron.';





';It was Graham who passed the Enron loophole ... with no hearings, no debate,'; Olberman emphasizes. ';It was Graham who stopped Democrats from closing the Enron loophole. ... Graham lobbied Congress about commodity trading rules in 2006.';





In addition, McCain's senior advisor, Charlie Black, was a lobbyist for the act containing the Enron loophole in 2000, and McCain's finance co-chair, Wayne Berman, has lobbied more recently against legislation to prevent price gouging.





Olbermann acknowledges that McCain is now saying, ';We must reforms the laws and regulations governing the oil futures market.'; However, McCain has not yet specifically mentioned the Enron loophole, and he still has Gramm and Berman and Black running his campaign and writing his economic policies
Have you heard about the one where the US carmakers fought for years to forbid any laws that would force them to make less thirsty engines?
No, because most of the recent run-up is due to speculators who need a jolt to get them out of the market.
Hell No!
No, I don't.





Better late than never...
  • facial
  • No comments:

    Post a Comment