Skip to comments.
Richardson To Protect Otero Mesa (NM, to prevent oil and gas drilling)
The Albuquerque Journal ^
| February 1, 2004
| Tania Soussan
Posted on 02/01/2004 11:49:00 AM PST by CedarDave
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
This may be the real reason that Richardson fired the director of the NM oil and gas agency last week. This is NM's ANWR -- an area so desolate that it makes parts of Iraq look like a rain forest. The RATS really want to make US more dependent on foreign sources of oil for their expensive, foreign-made SUV's.
1
posted on
02/01/2004 11:49:02 AM PST
by
CedarDave
To: BOBTHENAILER; Grampa Dave; farmfriend; Ernest_at_the_Beach
BUMP for what may be the real story behind last week's firing. Please ping to your lists.
2
posted on
02/01/2004 11:51:23 AM PST
by
CedarDave
(Weasely Clark is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but an egotistical opportunist.)
To: CedarDave
" The RATS really want to make US more dependent on foreign sources of oil"True!
To: All
A little more on last weeks firing: The memo from a trade association that I saw said that the director was perceived as being too friendly to the industry for the likes of the Richardson administration. In light of today's story, that probably means that she was "fair and balanced" in applying rules and regulations to allow drilling and development, i.e. allow drilling to proceed while protecting the environment. However, this is not enough for the enviro-whackos -- no new drilling in areas not already drilled is their stand.
4
posted on
02/01/2004 12:02:04 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Weasely Clark is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but an egotistical opportunist.)
To: CedarDave
Just In: All oil drilling in the Arab states will come to a halt! It has been found that the rare desert asp and the very rare dune beetle are on the very edge of becoming extinct. Because of this and there can be no drilling what so ever on U.S. soil or off shore, gas prices are expected to soar to $27.00 a gallon in the very near future. Many of the sitting politicians are worried about getting reelected when their term is over.
(I just made all of this up, but am I way off base?)
5
posted on
02/01/2004 12:10:28 PM PST
by
fish hawk
To: Gallegos
Ping.
Thought you might be interested.
6
posted on
02/01/2004 12:12:53 PM PST
by
Missouri
To: CedarDave
7
posted on
02/01/2004 12:14:00 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Weasely Clark is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but an egotistical opportunist.)
To: fish hawk; CedarDave
soar to $27.00 a gallon in the very near futureShould be soar to $97.00 a gallon in the very near future
8
posted on
02/01/2004 12:14:44 PM PST
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
To: CedarDave
The Mecca of Environmental crackpots!!!!
I lived there for a while. Lovely place to visit. Awful to live there if conservative in any way!
Lots of money flowing around for those in the right crowd.
Heard some good music at the "Save the Horses " benefit at the old adobe church.
9
posted on
02/01/2004 12:19:43 PM PST
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
To: CedarDave
Ned Farquhar? Richardson was cartoonish enough without staff with silly names. Sheesh!
10
posted on
02/01/2004 12:22:16 PM PST
by
Wally_Kalbacken
(Seldom right, never in doubt!)
To: CedarDave
We can expect a lot more of this insanity from him. Didn't he appoint a huge number of environ_MENTAL wackos to his cabinet?
11
posted on
02/01/2004 12:56:36 PM PST
by
NRA2BFree
(DemonRATS who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.)
To: NRA2BFree
Richardson is Hillary's VP in 2008, this is a good warmup for him. Let see if the administration has the guts to take him on, I doubt it.
To: NRA2BFree
We're not talking about just cabinet officers here. We're talking about non-civil service lower ranked department and division officals, and members of state oversight boards and commissions. He fired ("requested resignations" from) absolutely everyone he could legally fire after he took office (and made those he couldn't fire very uncomfortable), and replaced them with political appointees who were in complete agreement with him and his policies. So the answer to your question would be "yes".
13
posted on
02/01/2004 1:18:22 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Weasely Clark is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but an egotistical opportunist.)
To: razorback-bert
PING
14
posted on
02/01/2004 1:19:54 PM PST
by
CedarDave
(Weasely Clark is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, but an egotistical opportunist.)
To: CedarDave
IDIOT.
COMMIE, SELFISH, GRANDSTANDING, SLIMY IDIOT.
15
posted on
02/01/2004 1:43:02 PM PST
by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: CedarDave
Democrats are the problem and rabidly committed to preventing any solution.
16
posted on
02/01/2004 1:51:23 PM PST
by
F.J. Mitchell
( Dems! Ask not what your party can do "for" you-ask what it has done "to" 44 million unborn humans.)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I moved to the northern part of the state from Texas several years ago. Didn't even last a year. I was actually a "moderate" Dem voter when I got there. That was my first opportunity to be surrounded by leftists--- and my first exposure to complete government incompetency (a bridge taking 30 years to build, for one), modern-day voter fraud (I actually thought it was a thing of the past), professional protestors, people preferring illegals in their state to out-of-staters, and people still being pi$$ed off at things that happened 500 years ago.
I came back to Texas 11 months later a fire-breathing nail-spitting arch-conservative.
17
posted on
02/01/2004 2:01:23 PM PST
by
stands2reason
("I guess in the long run, Lenin was right."---Don Joe, 1-31-04)
To: oceanview
Richardson is Hillary's VP in 2008, this is a good warmup for him. Let see if the administration has the guts to take him on, I doubt it. I'm afraid you're right. The (only) good news is IF they should win, NM would get rid of him. Unfortunately, I don't think this administration will take him on either.
18
posted on
02/01/2004 2:07:17 PM PST
by
NRA2BFree
(DemonRATS who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.)
To: CedarDave
We're not talking about just cabinet officers here. We're talking about non-civil service lower ranked department and division officals, and members of state oversight boards and commissions. He fired ("requested resignations" from) absolutely everyone he could legally fire after he took office (and made those he couldn't fire very uncomfortable), and replaced them with political appointees who were in complete agreement with him and his policies. So the answer to your question would be "yes". I remember reading how he got rid of them all not long after he took office. I think the article said he appointed 39 environ_MENTAL wacko's after he got rid of the others.
19
posted on
02/01/2004 2:11:38 PM PST
by
NRA2BFree
(DemonRATS who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.)
To: stands2reason
ROFL!!!!
20
posted on
02/01/2004 2:18:05 PM PST
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson