« Obamaniacs Change Their Names to Hussein | Main | Dumped Lesbian Cries Bigamy »

That will be some legacy she leaves, once her "flagship" issue sinks.

Moonbat terrorism is like Islamic terrorism without the charisma.

Of course she's a lunatic. Look at her constituents.

If people ever get the news, put two and two together and it dawns on them what she's doing to this country, she'll be tarred and feathered.

"We're going to kill the economy, destroy your savings, maybe even get you thrown out of your job...to 'save the planet'." Right. I understand. Punish hard working Americans because you idiots won't do what's right...and then TAKE A VACATION.

I blame the President. CALL A SPECIAL SESSION OF CONGRESS! Make 'em vote. Don't let Nine Percent Nancy get away with this. WHERE IS YOUR LEADERSHIP, Mr. President?

In the mean time, don't forget the Air Car which, if brought here and gotten up to U.S. standards could end most of this problem within a year...NANCY! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmqpGZv0YT4

OT - here is one guy who would vote for Nancy PolPotLucy...

Killer says he's too fat to safely execute – needs the ACLU to help his weak Public appointed Attorney

She is one scary lady, kind of reminds me of most of the liberal party of Canada. It's funny but
in that pic she kinda looks like Dalton McGuinty in drag, The Premier of Ontario.

I'm thinkin that picture of her looks more like Geena Davis, circa Commander in Chief.

Hey Jimbo,

That Pic of Nancy PolPotLucy reminds me of an old saying...

I would not let her .... my (you know what), even if it was your (you know what).

Fugly and mean the PolPot is.

Nancy PolPotLucy wants the USA to be the next Socialist Killing Fields!

The number-one job of Congress is to "save the planet"? Funny, I thought Congress had a very clear job to do, one that all Congressmen swear an oath to.

This is what the Nancy 'Killing Fields' PolPotLucy wants
From Crayons to Condoms - Our schools have become laboratories for social engineering and are no longer places where knowledge is transmitted.

This helps explain in part, what the Pelosi et al are all about.

"In truth, however, neither the common man nor the environment matter to the Democrats. Rather, they are driven by what they fear, and what they fear is a people free enough to live independently of a paternal government."

Excerpt from:
http://www.humanevents.com:80/article.php?id=27782

Posted by: Oiao at August 4, 2008 12:52 PM

Hey Jimbo,

That Pic of Nancy PolPotLucy reminds me of an old saying...

I would not let her .... my (you know what), even if it was your (you know what).

Fugly and mean the PolPot is.

Nancy PolPotLucy wants the USA to be the next Socialist Killing Fields!

How ironic... a site named moonbattery featuring such learned conservative scholars as this guy (he posts a lot).

Absolutely no attempt to make an intelligent statement (as if) just some gratuitous attacks and personal insults and no attempt to address the issue.
The issue is oil. In no way does your article explain Pelosi's opposition to drilling; it's more you have taken a couple of out-of-context quotes and ridiculed them.
The fact is, more drilling is not going to lower the price of oil, according to the Governments' own estimates, and only prolongs the inevitable. We can drill ( and wait the 6-10 years it will take to recover any oil) and end up down the road with the same problem. We cannot drill our way to energy independence. Other sources of energy will need to be developed. We can wait 10 years for the new oil, or spend that time developing alternative fuels (no, not corn-based ethanol) and technologies to conserve what we now waste, while replacing the 19th century technology we are relying on (the internal combustion engine), with 21st century technology.
Mercedes Benz will stop making gas powered cars in just a few years...then it's electric or fuel cell only. That should decrease demand for oil, which LOWERS the price.
If GM and Ford had any kind of leadership, they would do the same. But no, they want to sell you SUV's and Hummers.
Don't believe the Republic hype. We CAN NOT drill our way out of our energy problems. In fact, drilling prolongs what pResident Bush termed 'our addiction to oil'. Only Libruls coddle addicts, so you drill monkeys are enabling the addicts.
Nice job!

/\ The time and place to have an intelligent argument was on the floor of Congress, which your friends the DemocRATS are avoiding like the plague.
Thank GOD they revealed who and what they are to even the most skeptical liberal just in time to rethink the November Presidential election.
I'm all for the Republican Gorilla Congress,,,give me any politician who doesn't allow Nancy Pelosi to carry his testicles around in her purse!

The fact is, that drilling will drop the price of oil. The price of oil is artificially inflated based on projected supplies as predicated on present production. If production is seen to be increased, the price will fall. New production can be on line in much lower than 6-10 years - like two.

The next reason to drill is that you and all the other leftists make the mistake of thinking oil=gas=SUV=CO2=dead polar bears.

The reality is that oil is used in a plethora of necessary things such as fertilizer, pharmaceuticals, anything made of any kind of plastic, refigerants, adhesives, textiles, etc. etc. - damn near everything.

Because you and other leftists are incapable of thinking of second and third order effects you fail to realize that the ubiquity of oil and oil based products have drastically improved the "environment" since their inception, for example, mechanized farming and fertilizers markedly increase yield/acre which means less land needed, hence one of the reasons for increased forestation in the US over the last century.

Bottom line - between proven energy technology like nukes, and increased oil production via wells and oil sands/shales, we indeed can become energy dependent. All we need is dolts like you who have been saying "we can't wait 10 years" for the last 30 to get the hell out of the way of productive humans.

"Mercedes Benz will stop making gas powered cars in just a few years...then it's electric or fuel cell only." news to me

"In no way does your article explain Pelosi's opposition to drilling; it's more you have taken a couple of out-of-context quotes and ridiculed them.
The fact is, more drilling is not going to lower the price of oil, according to the Governments'"

I think her position to drilling is not to do it.

She is anti everything like the most pro-green
politicians no nuclear, no coal, no hydro,

Just green wet-dreams that one can afford except
millionaires like her that don't care one bit about you or me. She's going to save the planet first, her and Al Gore and his buddy's

Just talk of opening up drilling has lowered the price per barrel of oil by 20 bucks or more.
where have you been?

Hey, I caught a 'Troll.' Been fishing all day and that was a solid bite with a set hook.

Pulling in the Troll DanMingo, I see that the troll is very short in stature and well below the size of the legal limit. Guess I'll just throw the little DanMingo mental midget back and call it a day.

Thanks for the laugh at your expense Dan.

Once again, hearty commendations on finding the most flattering image possible for the Moonbat in question.

I don't know how much Ms. Pelosi knows about modern manufacturing or automobiles, but even a golf cart uses petroleum based products in it lubricants and structure.
The only non-petroleum based means of transport I can think of would be a horse and buggy. If you think smog is a problem today, imagine what it was like in 1906 when the pollution had to be swept off the streets before it drew flies.

"James McEnanly at August 4, 2008 8:09 PM"

You're right about the horse and buggy thing, except we would still need oil to grease the axels! Yes, a hundred years ago CARS were seen as a good thiing because it would eliminate "horse polution".

The 10 years before we see oil argument is a canard. There are no technical obstacles that would prevent oil from being produced within 1-2 years. The only obstacles are regulatory... put in place by Congress and the EPA. If Government just shut up and got out of the way, we could have access to oil much, much sooner.

Posted by: Oiao at August 4, 2008 6:47 PM

Wow, excellent point on why we should drill.
Exactly; you have no point.
Thanks to those who, while attributing a leftward lean at least addressed the issue somewhat. You can disagree with me, I expect you to, but without anything to offer other than insults, you do not 'win'. You just look foolish to anyone really concerned with how to fix our problems. So, yes you caught a troll, but cannot debate him on the issues. So, who 'wins' trollcatcher?
Mercedes Benz WILL cease production of gas-powered vehicles by 2015
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/06/mercedes-eliminate-petroleum-7-years-2015.php
Dispute that oahu or whatever your name is.
Here's a quote from the article you never heard of: "Their plan is to make their whole car lineup petroleum free in 7 years. To do that, they're looking at battery electric cars, fuel cells, and more efficient combustion engines that can run on biofuels (lets hope that by then we have truly sustainable ethanol and biodiesel). "The company have already spent £2million on their new long-term Sustainable Mobility plan and are set to invest a further £7billion before 2014." Of course, there's a catch: A car that can run on biofuels can still run on fossil fuels, so without a good supply of sustainable biofuels, that's probably how they're going to be used. But still, a step in the right direction."

Now imagine every American Auto company setting for themselves the same goal; eliminate fossil fuel burners in 7 years. The price of gas will plummet, plenty of oil left to make plastics and whatever because we don't need to burn it for transportation.
Now, which goal for 2015 offers more to the people on this planet. More drilling for oil, that will eventually run out, more nuclear power, with waste we cannot process and is a lure for the terrorists, or electric cars which allows for the continued use of petroleum-based products, but at much lower cost (because cars don't need them).
This is not pie in the sky wait 30 years technology. We have it now, it needs capitol investment, and more technology breakthroughs to improve efficiency, but we CAN do this.
Other than the oil companies, why would anyone be opposed to eliminating fossil fuels as energy for transportation?
What is your argument against using our technological expertise versus the technology of the past?
I can make this argument without the environmental issues you ascribed to me. This makes economic sense, and national security sense (no more blood for oil). If the environment is better for it, that's just a bonus. I am not making the environmental argument you used against me. That's called a strawman argument.

The 10 years before we see oil argument is a canard. There are no technical obstacles that would prevent oil from being produced within 1-2 years. The only obstacles are regulatory... put in place by Congress and the EPA. If Government just shut up and got out of the way, we could have access to oil much, much sooner.
Posted by: V the K at August 5, 2008 7:07 AM
"Rather, years of exploration is required before drilling can even begin. In some cases, no oil is found on leases they hold. In others, drilling the wells and building the pipelines takes years. It is especially hard now that a worldwide boom in oil exploration has pushed up the prices - and timelines - for skilled workers and specialized equipment. http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/23/news/economy/oil_drilling/index.htm?cnn=yes

Oil companies have millions of acres of land they have leased for oil exploration. They can drill there right now and no federal agency is stopping them. It is their choice to leave the oil in the ground. Also, domestic drilling HAS increased dramatically in recent years.

The regulatory obstacles are for the OCF and protected areas within the States, but that leaves millions of acres of leases already acquired where no drilling is going on. Congress tried to pass legislation forcing the oil companies to drill on land which they have already acquired leases for BEFORE new areas were opened. The GOP shot it down.
There is your answer. The GOP (greedy oil party) shot down energy legislation that would force oil companies to actually drill on the land they already have.
"Of the 90 million offshore acres the industry has leases to, mostly in the Gulf of Mexico, it is estimated that upwards of 70 million are not producing oil, according to both Democrats and oil-industry sources."
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/23/news/economy/oil_drilling/index.htm?cnn=yes
Their current farce about drilling only takes in the rubes.

Dan, do YOU have the money for a new car? I don't. Another thing; what will we do with the OLD gas-burners, dump them in a land-fill?

Dan, do YOU have the money for a new car? I don't. Another thing; what will we do with the OLD gas-burners, dump them in a land-fill?

Posted by: KHarn at August 5, 2008 6:28 PM
I do not have the money for a new car, but many do, and maybe by 2012 I will too. By then the price of alternate vehicles should be dropping due to economies of scale as auto companies begin delivering what we need from them.
As for gas vehicles, they will still be legal and gas will be cheaper, but if no more gas powered cars are made, eventually they will just be phased out, or retrofitted to an alternate source of energy.
In about 1980 Gm put out some electric cars for two year leases as an experiment. I knew someone that had two of them.
After the lease period expired, GM would not allow anyone to keep their electric cars. Even those who offered to purchase them outright.
Gm took the cars and CRUSHED them, and decided to make SUV's and Hummers instead.
That worked out well.

The "millions of acres of leases" is also a canard, since only a fraction of those acres contain oil. On the other hand, the oil companies are prevented from drilling in places where they know there is oil.

To make an analogy, Democrat policy on oil is equivalent to telling farmers, "Why should we let you grow corn in Iowa when we already gave you leases to you grow it in the Mojave Desert?"

"Now imagine every American Auto company setting for themselves the same goal; eliminate fossil fuel burners in 7 years."

You are thinking to small. Just "imagine" if the auto companies set a goal to invent the transporter in the next 3 to 5 years. That will show those oil companies.

It is very simple to figure out why they wont let drilling come up for a vote. And nobody can see through this.

They are protecting Obama. If the bill comes up for a vote, he will vote 'no' (of flip-flop) with a 'yes'. And his numbers will drop like a rock !