Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arctic drilling dropped from House bill
PMSNBC ^ | 11/09/05 | www.msnbc.msn.com

Posted on 11/10/2005 1:51:13 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: LibLieSlayer
It is not ALL Congressional Republicans doing this. Many are fighting tooth and nail to stop these Rino B*stards

It's the house leaders. They are doing the bidding of the eco-nuts and RINOs, which probably includes the slimy anti-drilling Florida delegation.

21 posted on 11/10/2005 3:35:08 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! --kellynla)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Sen. Dominici (R, NM), chairman of the Senate Energy committee, insists on ANWR being in the conference report.
Then we'll see if the House RINOs vote against the conference report & thus torpedo the budget. Some heavy arm twisting needed in the House, without DeLay.


22 posted on 11/10/2005 3:41:10 AM PST by Otho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

WHAT DON'T THESE FREAKING IDIOTS NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT "WE NEED MORE US OIL"??!!!!!!!!


23 posted on 11/10/2005 3:41:18 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Lookit--I'm no environmentalist, but I consider my self a conservationist--conservative. I read that there is only enough oil in ANWR to last the US six months. I mean, is that really worth screwing up the land like that? Talk about PORK!!

The fact is, we use 25% of the world's oil and we only produce 3%. As long as we are dependent on mid-east oil we can look forward to our President going hat-in hand to the Saudi's.

I tellya, when I think about all those oil-soaked sheiks dressed in only their oil barrels, it makes me (almost ) want to go buy a Prius, LOL.
24 posted on 11/10/2005 3:44:04 AM PST by ktvaughn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
In election 2000, Bush won FL only because the Green Party siphoned off a lot of dem votes that would have elected Gore.

Not really. Cuban Americans fed up with the Clinton/Gore kidnapping of Elian Gonzales voted Republican in droves. Gore tried to fend this off by claiming he was against the kidnapping, but the voters didn't buy it. That was the largest block in play.

Also if you recall, one of the biggest issues in the 2000 election were voters, particularly on Florida's east coast, who voted for Buchanan. They alone generated the margin of victory in some areas where the Greens had little traction.

Nader/Green party voters wouldn't go for Gore (and they didn't) or any Republican candidate. No Green party voter is ever going to vote Republican - even for a RINO.

Trying to appease them is a waste of time. Losing core voters who can't afford to fill their gas tanks is how you lose elections.

25 posted on 11/10/2005 3:44:49 AM PST by freeandfreezing (Charlie Bass - what were you thinking?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

I know the type. We had them all in our face, trying to stop offshore Natural Gas wells in the Gulf... but Katrina, $3.50 a gallon Gas, and 5 mile long Gas lines put a crimp in the support for their cause. We will have those gas wells pumping in the near future here (in Mississippi)!

LLS


26 posted on 11/10/2005 4:06:14 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Otho

I am told by a friend working in the House that Tom is still "hammering" away. A price will be paid by those that embrace liberal causes.

I for one will work against any Rino aiding those dims, as I hate dims almost as much as I hate radical muzzies!

LLS


27 posted on 11/10/2005 4:08:28 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Tom need to take some time from hammering and do some fishing. There is a "Bass" in the House that needs to be caught and stuck on a "stringer"! I always expected democ RATS to jump a sinking ship, but the RINO's are bailing as soon as they feel a little condensation on the bulkhead!


28 posted on 11/10/2005 4:23:31 AM PST by stitches1951
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
OK, I'm feeling a little frustrated here.

Do they think signs like this will help their re-election chances?

29 posted on 11/10/2005 4:31:36 AM PST by gridlock (Remember: Choosy newsies choose Iowahawk!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ktvaughn
[Lookit--I'm no environmentalist, but I consider my self a conservationist--conservative. I read that there is only enough oil in ANWR to last the US six months. I mean, is that really worth screwing up the land like that? Talk about PORK!!]

I don't believe this. The industry would not want to drill in ANWR if this is so, and they want to drill. A retired BP CEO stated that there is more oil in the Gulf of Mexico then in all Islamic controlled oil supplying Arab nations. I to am a conservative and a conservationist and believe that the left wing of America manipulates politicians and oil companies by organizations of fanatics such as the marxist libs and pantheists who largely run the E.P.A., an government organization dedicated to the destruction of America.
30 posted on 11/10/2005 4:33:40 AM PST by kindred (Only God is good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: freeandfreezing
Yes really. Election results are on the internet for all to read.

And it wasn't just Florida. The democratic state of West Virginia voted for Bush. Without FL and WV, Bush would not have been elected.

WV felt double crossed by Clinton when he sided with the enviros on mountain top mining. Bush and Gore both campaigned on changing the definition of "waste" but WV didn't believe Gore because of Clinton.

31 posted on 11/10/2005 4:44:27 AM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

This is outrageous. The House GOP caved to the leftists for fear of making them angry and causing a bureaucratic fight!

Denny Hastert is going to get a superblast nastygram from me. We have the authority to drill in ANWR, they need to stop screwing with it and get on with the job. Granted it won't get us a fresh source of oil tomorrow, but it should secure a fresh source of oil in about two years.

Who wants to bet on what our oil needs will be in two years? Anyone?


32 posted on 11/10/2005 4:46:51 AM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Text of my email to Speaker Dennis Hastert:

Dear Mr. Speaker,

I am outraged that House Republican leaders have caved in to environmentalist demands and taken drilling in the ANWR off the table in the current budget bill. Across America, voters of every political position have been stung by the steep rise in gas prices that we have experienced at the pump and will soon experience for home heating oil.

Allowing the ANWR issue to be pulled from the budget bill is a huge betrayal to the American people. I might remind you, Mr. Speaker, that this country is at war in a region that produces a percentage of the oil we consume. Other oil producing countries that supply our oil needs are vehemently opposed to our War in Iraq and the War on Terror overall. Our neighbor, Canada, has become increasingly strident in its opposition to the positions of the United States and Venezuela is sabre-rattling toward us.

We have relied on House Republicans to provide strong, grounded direction to the Senate Republicans but, clearly, it is becoming more evident that the Republican Party has lost its way and is becoming indistinguishable from its political opposition. As we approach the mid-term election cycle, Republicans in either house of the Congress need to carefully consider who they want to be. If the voters are unable to clearly distinguish the difference between Republicans and Democrats, there is a very real chance that the majorities that Republicans currently enjoy in both houses are likely to diminish.

As a nation at war, we need to secure our own sources of energy in order to be able to continue to prosecute the wars necessary to safeguard the future of this nation. For God's sake and the sake of this nation, grow a spine and start acting like a conservative, moral leader whose primary concern is the future of this nation, NOT ensuring that the members of the political opposition aren't mad at you!! The despicable and cowardly behavior of the Republican majorities in BOTH houses MUST cease immediately!! Stop spending like Democrats and start acting responsibly to preserve and protect the future of this nation.


33 posted on 11/10/2005 5:14:01 AM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Give me a reason why I should vote Republican next November, other than the incredibly lame, "Well, gosh, if you don't vote for them, why the Democrats will win" response. The argument is as lame as the one that goes, "Well gee, do you want to pay $6 for a head of lettuce?"


34 posted on 11/10/2005 5:16:41 AM PST by Uncle Vlad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

I am contacting these worthless b@astards (congressmen) and thanking them personally for financing the war on terrorism (too bad it is on the arab side)


35 posted on 11/10/2005 5:19:04 AM PST by newcthem (And Atlas Shrugged.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
I'm so *&^%$#@ sick of this! How many times does this drilling in *&^%$#@ ANWAR have to be approved before it's actually approved?!How stupid are these people? Do they really want to complain about the high price of gas or our dependency on foreign oil but don't want to allow drilling anywhere.
36 posted on 11/10/2005 5:25:43 AM PST by edchambers (Neocon foot-soldier of the Haliburton death squad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ktvaughn

That 'estimate' is wildly inaccurate and BS. Your 'arguments' appear from the socialist handbook. Drilling would NOT 'screw up' the land. The proposed drilling site is essentially wasteland and smaller than the area covered by Logan airport in a park about the size of Rhode Island. The US CONSUMES more energy than anyone else because we PRODUCE more, and more efficiently than anyone else in the world. We also support a greater population of deadbeats and residents of '3rd world hell-holes' that wouldn't exist without our help on a per capita basis than anyone else in the world - that's counting government aid extorted through taxes, corporate contributions extorted by inflated prices, and private donations through voluntary donations to religious and anti-religious groups.


37 posted on 11/10/2005 5:34:21 AM PST by NHResident (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ktvaughn
I read that there is only enough oil in ANWR to last the US six months. I mean, is that really worth screwing up the land like that?

First of all are you a geologist?Do you work for an oil company?How do you know how much oil is there? Second why do you care if some useless, far away frozen tundra you will most likely never see is "screwed up".And finally what makes you think it will "screw up" anything when the drilling and pipeline that went in years ago clearly hasn't.

38 posted on 11/10/2005 5:38:49 AM PST by edchambers (Neocon foot-soldier of the Haliburton death squad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

This says it all. This is why we are losing. Too many elected Republicans are gutless.


39 posted on 11/10/2005 5:44:20 AM PST by KenmcG414
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ktvaughn
According to the USGS

(http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm)

The total quantity of technically recoverable oil within the entire assessment area is estimated to be between 5.7 and 16.0 billion barrels (95-percent and 5- percent probability range), with a mean value of 10.4 billion barrels. Technically recoverable oil within the ANWR 1002 area (excluding State and Native areas) is estimated to be between 4.3 and 11.8 billion barrels (95- and 5-percent probability range), with a mean value of 7.7 billion barrels (table 1).

I've heard estimates ranging from 500,000 to 1,000,000 barrels per day for maximal sustained daily production. Daily consumption in this country is about 20 million barrels a day. ANWR under production would last far longer than 6 months (many years in fact), but would account for about 2.5% to 5% of daily consumption assuming demand were not to increase.

The six month figure is an inaccurate simplification, based on the fact that in a six month period of time this county uses 10 million barrels of oil, roughly equivalent to what ANWR is thought to contain. But ANWR is an oil field not a gas tank. The rate of production is determined by the size of the field and the permeability of the rock as well as other oil field characteristics. Its technically impossible to drain ANWR of its oil in a 6 month time frame.

40 posted on 11/10/2005 6:02:46 AM PST by NYorkerInHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson