« Obamunists | Main | PETA Does Its Part to Defend the Border »

They're playing the same sort of games in the UK.

Wouldn't it be more profitable to parrot the "drill, drill, drill" hoax? Concidering how Big Oil has given McCain around $1.1M since his no drill/drill flip flop, it's not hard to deduce where the money's at. So, Pelosi is fighting being bought out by Big Oil to drive up stock on her $100K-$200K investment? Funny grasp. You might be able to pull it off though considering how Republicans are getting people to believe that drilling will give them instant and huge relief at the pumps.

So, andy, I guess you are also opposed to the thousands of jobs that developing American domestic energy production would create at no cost to government? Perhaps you prefer the Democrat plan of borrowing billions more from China in order to create subsidized 'green' jobs, and pay-offs to campaign contributors with 'green energy' schemes? Or maybe you just like the idea of the U.S. sending billions of dollars every year to overseas terror regimes in Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Russia instead of cleanly and responsibly developing domestic oil reserves. Is that where you're coming from, andy? Billions for terror regimes and billions in debt because a bunch of out-of-touch environmentalist Luddites think Americans are too dumb to be able to drill responsibly?

Republicans have not promised instant and huge relief at the pumps. We are in this position because of things we didn't do 10, 20, even 30 years ago. Or rather because of things we weren't ALLOWED to do, when we allowed Eco-Luddites (not to overuse the word) to take control of our future energy development.

If the market price of gasoline continues to fall (as it looks like we are starting to take responsibility for our energy supplies) that is a short-term benefit, but it does not negate the need for more domestic supplies.

Increasing domestic supplies is a longer-term strategy to augment the other long-term strategies (wind, solar, nuclear, conservation) that Republicans acknowledge is part of addressing the problem.

Drill Here, Drill Now is a far better strategy for delivering more supply than Tax Here, Tax Now as proposed by Democrats (and their five new RINO friends in the Senate).

Even if our oil companies are allowed to do what they do best, now that we have broken that psychological $4/gallon barrier, "we have been warned" that it can return again and our free-market can "do its thing" regarding alternatives and conservation strategies. If we just let it.

That’s hardly the case. I didn’t say I was opposed to anything V The K. That’s something that from your own admission, you “guessed”. I was simply saying that if Pelosi was in it for the money, she (like John McCain) could simply bow to big oil and rake in the cash. It’s pretty audacious of you to read into that and “guess” that I support job losses, borrowing from China, or that I support terror regimes. That’s the typical rhetorical fear mongering that’s to be expected from the remaining Bush loyalists.

I don’t necessary oppose new drilling. What I oppose is the fact that for the Republican Party, rewarding Big Oil has to come first before taking care of the American people and America’s problems. Unless drilling is on the table, nothing’s on the table .They're following the same playbook and what seems to be the only play they have in this election- drill here, drill now and you'll no longer feel pain at the pump. John McCain told a group of bikers that “We’re not going to pay $4 dollars a gallon for gas because we are going to drill offshore and we are going to drill now. We are going to drill here and we are going to drill now”. Wasn’t it just a month ago that President Bush said he had no magic wand? Now, presto/light bulb idea that opening drilling will make it all go away. Most everyone acknowledges the need for nuclear, bio diesel, coal gas, natural gas, etc. along with a need to drill. The problem is however that Republicans have refused to work out anything on the oil crises UNLESS drilling is included. They’ve basically said “look, Big Oil is our largest contributor and they want to drill any damn place they want and any time they want. We owe that to them because, uh, well, they own us”.
This “drill now” is an absolute scam and will do nothing to relieve the price of gas at the pumps. If you want to use the argument of new jobs, that’s fine but don’t hide behind the lie that it will relieve us at the pump. It also defies any common sense in breaking our addiction to oil. People are angry, scared and broke. What an opportune time for Republicans to do what they do best; con or scare voters into thinking they’re doing something for them when in fact, they are only helping their campaign contributors.
What amazes me is that the Democrats can’t even get enough spine to expose the Republicans for what they have done and have somehow excepted blame for the disaster we’re in. Let’s take a look at what happened when the R’s were in Power from 2004-2006. They repeatedly voted against cracking down on price gouging, defeating Democrats efforts. They promoted tax breaks for the oil companies. They refused to encourage better fuel efficiency in the automotive industry. (HR3893, Vote #518, 10/7/05; HR3893, Vote #517, 10/7/05; HR3402, Vote #500, 9/28/05; HR6, Vote #118, 4/20/05)
Wonder why? Perhaps the $8.6 million in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies with 84% of it going to Republicans could be a clue.
We’ve all heard the talking points explaining why drilling will do nothing. Even President Bush and John McCain have conceded that it will do nothing (other than a psychological sugar pill). Still, Republicans refuse to work out anything UNLESS drilling is included. Reward the oil company first and then we’ll talk. It’s just like almost every piece of legislation American voters have seen the last 7 years. It will make a fortune for a Republican campaign contributor at the expense, or at best do absolutely nothing for the American people.
To quote a section of a New York Times editorial on Sunday; "Here is the underlying reality: A nation that uses one-quarter of the world’s oil while possessing less than 3 percent of its reserves cannot drill its way to happiness at the pump, much less self-sufficiency. The only plausible strategy is to cut consumption while embarking on a serious program of alternative fuels and energy sources. This is a point the honest candidate should be making at every turn".
It’s also interesting that John McCain has received $1.1 million from big oil since he flip flopped on his drilling stand.
Again, I'm not against new drilling. I'm just against the constant misleading and political posturing.

It also defies any common sense in breaking our addiction to oil.

"Addicted to oil" is the kind of lame sloganeering that substitutes for thought on the left. Our economy is "addicted to oil" in the same sense our bodies are addicted to blood. And the only solution the left has is to put our economy in a permanent state of anemia.

"We can't drill our way out of this" is another piece of dumb sloganeering. No one is suggesting that drilling alone is the solution, but it is a vital component of a rational energy policy. Contrary to the Pelosi Propaganda machine (a.k.a the MSM), the Republican approach is not drilling alone, but drilling in combination with conservation and the development of alternative fuels. To anyone with common-sense, this is an optimal solution.

"Price gouging" is another airhead leftist slogan. The marginal returns the oil companies receive are smaller than those of many other industries who are not accused of "price gouging." Furthermore, the same quarter where Exxon made $11 Billion in profits, the government confiscated $32 Billion in taxes from Exxon. Who's gouging whom, here?

Also, a person who understands that markets work better than government mandates would ask what business does the government have telling me what kind of car I can drive? What is so wrong with letting the market decide what fuel economy standards should be? Oh, right, that would involve freedom. And as Castro used to say, Freedom is a precious commodity and must be carefully rationed by the government.

Andy, I think Nine Percent Nan could use a new public relations director. Maybe you could help her out, since you've got the "Republicans are bad" rap down so well.

"We use 25% of the worlds oil, but are 3% of the population!" And we produce more, innovate more, work harder and have a better standard of living than anyone else. But you'd like to change that, right?

Drill here, drill now. No foreign oil. Seal the borders. English as the official language.

And we produce more, innovate more, work harder and have a better standard of living than anyone else. But you'd like to change that, right?

Damn right, he would.

Why does the left have such irrational hatred of oil? Because oil is what gives freedom of movement and recreation to the working classes. Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore will never give up their SUV's, their private jets or their yachts... but the sight of common people being able to travel, being able to take the family to the beach, to watch a NASCAR race makes them sick to their stomachs.

So, it's all about making "the little people" sacrifice. If they could just get the working people to give up their "addiction to oil" and submit to public transportation and "staycations," they'd have the freeways, the airports, and the beaches all to themselves... and to other rich elitists who can really appreciate them.

The term " breaking our addiction to oil" originated from your man Bush at his SOTUA. Remember? It isn't a left slogan.

I don't know how you can get $32B out of $11B but I'm not even going to argue that one.

"No one is suggesting that drilling alone is a solution" John McCain said “We’re not going to pay $4 dollars a gallon for gas because we are going to drill offshore and we are going to drill now". How do you take that? Drilling will makes us never have to pay $4 again.

My argument is that Republicans are demanding that oil companies get their gifts 1st, even by foolong the American people. After that, they'll work on fixing the problem. That's why Americans aren't electing Republicans these days.

The term " breaking our addiction to oil" originated from your man Bush at his SOTUA

Ahem. Bush is not and never has been "my man."

But, I am not surprised that someone who thinks in cliches and slogans would go there.

I don't know how you can get $32B out of $11B but I'm not even going to argue that one.

The $11B was what Exxon was allowed to keep after the government took their $32B cut.

But, as you have amply demonstrated, economics is not your forte.

More oil drilling has always lowered or kept low the prices of oil, gasoline, and all the other petrochemicals.

Good point, mockinbird. Isn't it funny how "more drilling" is what all the other countries in the world are doing? They seem to have missed the memo that more drilling isn't going to help solve the problem.

Not literally all the other countries... but Russia, China, Sweden, Brazil, Norway, Iraq, and any other countries with access to oil are all developing new oil fields. In fact, wasn't Democrat Chuckie Schumer demanding that Saudi Arabia increase production? How is it Saudi oil will help relieve the price at the pump but American oil won't?

Let's see if andy has a lame-brained slogan to answer that.

Here's a few things that never comes up:

How much fuel will be SAVED when we don't need a large fleet of oil tankers sailing THOUSNADS OF MILES to the Middle East to get the oil that we could obtain in OUR OWN TERRITORY?

How many YEARS will it take to get solar and wind power plant operating and producing 10% of our electrical needs?

How are we to afford all those new hibrid and electric cars that will replace the TENS OF MILLIONS of cars on the roads now?

WHO has a manufacturing plant to MAKE all those cars? If no one, then how long will it take to get the assembly line up and running?

Right now, hibrid SUVs are being made, but they are pretty much experimental and only two companies make them. We wil;l need a lot more to replace all the emergency vehicles that are now in service, or needed for expansion.

Hey andy, the "addiction to oil" slogan is wrong. Bush is wrong on a lot of stuff. I'm a conservative, not a Republican Robot.

We are not "addicted" to oil. You can't be addicted to something when there is no viable choice. Are we "addicted" to electricity? Telephones? Flush toilets?

These are things we need in daily life. We are forced (no choice) to use FOREIGN OIL right now, and THAT we need to change.

We can then give ZERO dollars to OPEC. I'll pay $5 a gallon if it stays in the U.S. After that is stabilized, we can proceed with all the alternatives we like, and not be paying the Moslems to kill us.

Oh, and andy...why haven't you mentioned the Air Car? Haven't heard of it? It works, it is here now, it's viable...and your Holy Democrat, oil-hating saviors forgot to mention that to you.

You should try thinking for yourself for a change!

You should try thinking for yourself for a change!

If he could think for himself, he'd be a conservative.

KHarn, there are several issues I didn't mention. It's interesting how the contributors here cherry pick the issues I did mention and ignore the ones they choose. Then, after sugarcoating the topics they choose, attempt to strengthen their point with insults, rhetoric, and bashing Democrats and liberals, as if that makes them right. The problem with the folks here is that their wheel of intellect seems to be stuck in a proverbial rut and simply can't free itself from the channel that it follows. That's a disturbing thinking process requirement to be a conservative VK.

It's interesting how the contributors here cherry pick the issues I did mention and ignore the ones they choose.

This is what's known as 'projecting.' You do a rather good job of ignoring other people's points yourself.

What you don't get is that we're not arguing Republicans versus Democrats, we're arguing right versus wrong, what's good for the country versus what's bad for the country. Yeah, who's giving how much money to whom is a somewhat interesting political sidelight. But the meat of the debate is policy ad what's good for America, not whose team is 'winning.'

And, andy, you do express yourself in cliches and Democrat talking points and show no evidence of being able to cogitate outside those narrow parameters. It is a harsh evaluation, but it is also valid given what you've expressed in this thread.

My entire "point" was that this is all about accommodating campaign contributors as well as political posturing. It has nothing to do with what's good for America. It's about what's paramount to the oil contributors. It's about the Republican party misleading people into thinking that new drilling will never again allow oil to top $4 a gallon (per John McCain at the Sturgis bike rally and other insinuations by Republican representatives). It's also a charade that's trying to masquerade the Republican's blind lockstep loyalty to the worst Presidential leadership in history. It's about shifting the blame to a party that isn't guilty of this predicament. It's simply one more example of where a Republican contributor will gain a lot and the American people will get nothing. Oh, I said nothing. My bad. I guess they'll save a nickel a gallon 10-20 years from now. What was I thinking?

So, andy answers my assertion that he does nothing but thoughtlessly regurgitate Democrat talking points... by thoughtlessly regurgitating Democrat talking points.

Thanks for the demonstration.

VK, that last comment was consistent with your first. Your objective is obvious. You dismiss constructive debate by crying "talking points". You ignore the arguments of your opponent and create your own argument out of thin air. After winning your fabricated or spun argument, you dismiss the opponent with contempt. It's expected and assumed for your robo-responders to chime in in your defense or you to theirs. In the end, you never offer constructive dialog on the issue I present but rather rhetoric and diatribe.

Andy, real arguments are not made up of a bunch of empty cliches.

You refuse to debate the stupidity of the Democrat's position that the the USA should remain dependent on hostile and dictatorial regimes for oil. That is why you never answered the challenge of why Democrats encourage the Saudis to drill for more oil while claiming that American drilling "won't make any difference at the pump." You never answered the argument about why, if drilling won't work, other countries are exploring and drilling like never before. You never answered why you preferred centrally controlled government mandates (i.e. socialist command economy) to market solutions. No did you answer Kharn's challenge about the time it will take to replace tens of millions of gasoline powered vehicles with vehicles fueled by alternatives.

And then you have the gall to accuse other people of ignoring your "arguments," which are nothing more than Democrat talking points.

In fact, your entire argument boils down to you oppose drilling because you hate Republicans and you hate oil companies (a look at your blog confirms this) and you don't want either to benefit from increased energy production.

And, in your mind, the only "constructive" debate is when people accept your cliches without challenging them, and only debate on your narrow term of "Oh, isn't it evil that Republicans take money from oil companies." Frankly, I could care less if oil companies are giving money to politicians. I'm more pissed about the billions of taxpayers dollars politicians pay off to left-wing activist groups like ACORN, La Raza, and Planned Parenthood. But that's off-topic.

So, yes, you are dismissed with contempt.

Your assessment of what my argument boils down to is from your own fabrication, not what I presented. The contents of this post say that Pelosi's intentions are to make profits from her investments by keeping drilling down. I simply said that if money was her concern, she should join the oil team and make even more money just like McCain did. You finally addressed that by saying you don't care how much money oil gives them but that doesn't give credence to the money rational on Pelosi.
My other point was that drilling would produce such a minute amount of relief, if Republicans were truly concerned with the people, they would wouldn't boycott or stall in order take move legislation forward. It has an appearance that rewarding Big Oil and political posturing comes before the people.
I've never said that the US should remain dependent on foreign oil. I did say that drilling would do little to nothing to solve the problem. As mentioned (yeah, I know, mentioning statistics or fact are "talking points") we consume about 25% of the world’s oil yet produce about 2%. It would exceed expert’s wildest expectations to increase this to even as much as 3% leaving little gain in becoming independent.
As for the argument of other countries drilling like never before, it's because the damn stuff is valuable. It's like a gold rush. They are going it for the money. That's the reason Big Oil is buying Republican's votes. For the money, not for consumers.
I never said I preferred centrally controlled government mandates (i.e. socialist command economy) to market solutions.
As for Kharn's challenge about the time it will take to replace tens of millions of gasoline powered vehicles with vehicles fueled by alternatives, it will take an equal if not longer time before we see the first gallon of oil. In reality, drilling will only slow this progress.
This isn't about a hatred of Republicans; it's about Republicans selling us out for the dollar. That's what makes this forum wrong in saying Pelosi is in it for the bucks, something you never address. Nor did you address the profitable McCain flip flop (oh, you don't care, that's right) and you didn't address his claim that drilling now will eliminate the $4 a gallon. Instead, you created your own arguments in order to put me on the defensive and to drown out my points in the rhetoric.

I'm guessing those opposed to "big oil" here in the U.S. (ie Obnoxious the Clown) are just fine with "big oil" in the Middle East putting the screws to us?

"andy42302 at August 12, 2008 4:59 PM"

I was talking to YOU andy. You should have been addressing my questions instead of rushing to the conclusion that I was backing you up.

Try THIS on for size, Liberal Andy:

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_profile_of_the_United_States

KHarn, by whatever stretch of imagination that you've deduced that I concluded you were backing me is beyond rational thinking. Why should I have addressed your questions when they were an obvious distraction to my points? Why is it, that instead of addressing an issue with anything substantial, there has to be a diversion in order for you to get in your talking points? No one has answered a single question of mine nor have they given a rational rebuttal. Why didn't you ask me something like "what if a hurricane sank all them there tankers coming to the USA and if we had drilled, we'd still have oil?". You see KHarn, distractions , diversions, and spin is all you can produce. The objective seems to be to keep me defensively answering a lot of asinine questions that have nothing to do with the topic in order for you to declare victory. Yawn.

"Distractions" of your points? What the hell "points" were you making? You have refused to debate ANYTHING!

Sooner or later, you Liberals will have to face rality and take a stand. You had better pray to whatever deity you hold dear that your HALF-ARAB boy Oblama NEVER gets elected, if he does you'll have to take responsibility for the world's problemas and DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE about them!

KHarn, cherry pick much? Blind? Ignorant or just plain stupid? Perhaps you should consult someone before taking on a conversation that's obviously over your head. I'm not laughing with you for not being able to keep up by the way. So, I pray to a different deity than most folks? I'm half Arab supportive? Why not throw in some Islamic fascist beliefs while we're at it? It's funny how you moonbat lunatics buckle at the knees when you're nonsense is called out. Your hatred is deep and it's wide. Thank God(my God) that you're a minority and weakening as we speak. Please don't embarrass yourself by asking me to respond to this mundane gibberish again. Simply enjoy the lower depths where you few moonbats hover, flutter, and bask in your in you distance from realty, I prefer to rise above verse being sucked into a lapdog abyss. Oh, you guys are raking in the bucks while scamming Americans. Silly me. What elite god do you have?

Once again, Andy refuses to answer our questions.

If Andy was in a debate against a Jr. High Schooler with his "points", he would be LAUGHED out of the auditorium!