Posted on 03/02/2004 8:13:32 AM PST by hardhead
We'll see in November neo-Ms. Cleo.
Anyway I was attacking your demo talking points such as obscene corporate profits and your ignorace of the shortage of refinery capacity in the US, brought to us by your friends the demos and envirowhackos.
The Bush economic advisor's statement that outsourcing American jobs was a good thing and Alan Greenspan's threat to cut Social Security benefits along with President Bush's silence on those comments.
(Wouldn't want to PO those Wall Street hustlers and con-artist CEO's...)
Yup, it ought to be a real interesting election.
Your demo ignorance is showing again. If you owned a business(which it appears you don't) wouldn't you try to cut costs as much as possible, to put out the best product at a competitive price. It's called capitalism.
As for Social Security Greenspan can't cut it. Congress has to do it and the sooner the ponzi scheme is gone the better for future generations of Americans, IMO.
It's almost like they enjoy sticking the American people with an electrical cattle prod.
I am all for opening ANWR for drilling (made in the USA) oil.
Unfortunately there are not enough Republicans with the intestinal fortitude in Congress, or the White House, to get it going!
AND THE REPUBLICANS CONTROL IT ALL!!!
LOL!!!
The demos block it. Remember the Senate is close to 50-50 and the vast majority of those against drilling in ANWR are demos. A point that you are silent about. I can understand why, you can't put your buddies the demos in a bad light.
Go get um Dane.....
Wouldn't be Joe Hadenuf reply without some reference to your pathological hatred of hispanics on a thread about petrol economics, IMO.
BTW, Joe why don't you start up your oil company and you can charge 10 cents a gallon.
I know, I know you will hit the abuse button, because you can't stand anothers opinion about your opinion of hispanics.
I think that's a very good question. I was one of the optimists you mention. It was my opinion at the time that the administration was downplaying (even denying) the impact of U.S. control of Iraqi oil for political purposes. It made sense: the press and the Left were claiming (just as in '91), that Bush was going to war "for oil", and by golly only a satanist would do that.
I have always been of the mind that oil is one of the few things actually worth going to war over. Right now, the fate of billions of barrels of crude should be at our disposal. But we caught a bit of the integrities, and the line is now (as it was) that the Iraqi oil belongs to the Iraqi people. Could be one of the greatest strategic blunders in the history of warfare; but it makes us look nice.
So, there will be no "cheap" oil, as we had hoped pre-invasion. But, at the least, I think you can count on relative stability in the oil markets, because there is a certain amount of fear that we have instilled in the producers.
I realize Greenspan is just a paid mouthpiece for the RepubliRat party(s), one world, no borders, free traitor scum that are driving this country into third world status.
Congress has to do it and the sooner the ponzi scheme is gone the better for future generations of Americans, IMO.
OK, great. Lets see GW and the Republican party run on a platform advocating the abandoning of all government promises made to baby boomers who have paid SS taxes all their lives and the end of SS for all.
Believe me, Kerry and the demoRats would LOVE to see that form of political suicide played out by the Republicans!
LOL!
Consider yourself lucky. $2.26 for regular in Camarillo, CA, an hour west of L.A. I think the price yesterday for premium where I filled up was around $2.46.
The OPEC cartel's recent cut in production combined with horrendous taxes, shortages caused by the seasonal refinery changeover from heating oil to gasoline, California's idiotic gasoline additive regulations and the lower value of the dollar against the Euro are all factors.
Believe me, Kerry and the demoRats would LOVE to see that form of political suicide played out by the Republicans!
And let's see when what happens when the current staus quo results in 80% tax rates without a long term change in the system. That is what Bush is proposing and not leaving the boomers out in the cold, but you already knew that but decided to ignore that.
Six Republican senators turn against Bush on ANWR
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's plan to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling suffered a major blow last week as six Republican senators said they opposed inserting language into a must-pass budget bill that would give oil companies access to the refuge. ANWR, which is home to polar bears, caribou and other wildlife, sprawls across 19 million acres (7.7 million hectares) of Alaska's northeast corner.
The Republican-led House of Representatives passed energy legislation last year that would have opened ANWR to drilling, but a Democratic-led Senate did not pass similar legislation.
The White House contends that the refuge's potential 16 billion barrels of crude must be tapped to help reduce U.S. dependence on oil imports from unfriendly countries like Iraq.
But many Democrats and environmentalists oppose drilling, saying the administration should cut oil imports by boosting the mileage standards of gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles.
Six of the Senate's 51 Republicans, including former presidential candidate John McCain of Arizona, last week announced they would not go along with a plan to tack ANWR drilling language onto a massive spending bill this spring that would enact the new 2004 budget for the federal government.
"Because the opening of the Arctic refuge to drilling raises a host of policy concerns, including serious environmental ramifications, we do not believe this issue should be injected in the budget process," the lawmakers said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles.
The letter is the latest twist in a two-year legislative battle over drilling in the Alaskan refuge.
The Democratic-led Senate last year soundly defeated efforts to open the refuge, when drilling supporters fell short of the 60 votes needed to end debate on the controversial proposal and allow a final vote on the measure.
DRILLING BACKERS DON'T WANT A FILIBUSTER
To get around a filibuster this time around, supporters of opening the refuge want to attach drilling language to must-pass legislation to fund the 2004 budget for the federal government. They argue that such language is appropriate for budget legislation because of the fees the government would collect from leasing tracts in the refuge to oil companies.
Under Senate rules, budget legislation cannot be filibustered and only 50 votes would be needed to approve the bill and an attached ANWR drilling provision.
In addition to McCain, the letter was signed by Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois, and Mike DeWine of Ohio. The six were part of a group of eight Republicans who crossed the aisle last year to vote against ANWR drilling.
In his State of the Union speech to Congress earlier this week, President George W. Bush urged lawmakers to pass legislation enacting his national energy plan, which includes drilling in the refuge.
Two Democratic presidential hopefuls, Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, oppose ANWR drilling and have promised to filibuster any energy bill that would open the refuge.
A new poll released last week by The Wilderness Society showed that by a two-to-one margin, voters reject opening the Arctic refuge to oil drilling, even in the case of impending war with Iraq and a possible cut-off of some of America's oil supplies from the Middle East.
Meanwhile, the Senate Energy Committee announced last week a series of hearings that will focus on the energy challenges facing the United States and will also guide the development of comprehensive energy legislation.
"My top priorities will be hammering out a robust and diverse energy bill for floor consideration this summer," said panel chairman Pete Domenici.
"Right now, America is faced with energy challenges and opportunities. We are on the brink of war in the Middle East and dangerously dependent on Middle East oil," he added.
The panel will hold three hearings in February on oil and natural supplies, and energy production on federal lands - which could include drilling in the Arctic refuge.
Story by Tom Doggett
Story Date: 3/2/2003
The reason there is no oil drilling right now in ANWR is because of gutless, yellow, RINO republicans!
When they are in control of Congress and the White House they rule just like the Rat party!
Tweedledee party VS the Tweedledum party, pick your poison this fall America!
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.