T1B

Jack wrote:[WTF do you for a living

Dinsdale wrote: No wonder you side with the right -- you don't goive a shit about anyone but yourself, including your family and future offspring.

Dinsdale wrote:But remember, it's not YOUR fault -- blame the government.

Cicero wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:But remember, it's not YOUR fault -- blame the government.

No, thats what the Left does.

Honestly, I care about myself, my family and my friends. Everyone else?? Thats their fucking problem. If they can afford to have a SUV and pay the gas, so be it. If not, dont bitch me cause you cant and find some bullshit reason to blame me for it.

Diego in Seattle wrote:Let them eat cake, eh?

Dinsdale wrote:So, you're saying increased crime and rampant poverty is OK, just as long as "you get yours?" Americans living in the streets is OK, as long as 100 guys "get theirs?"

mvscal wrote: And how, exactly, would drilling ANWAR use public tax money for the gains of "Big Oil"?

Dinsdale wrote:

Jack wrote:[WTF do you for a living

A few different things, actually...none of which are any of your fucking business.

mvscal wrote:1.4 million barrels a day actually would "put a dent" in our dependence on foreign oil. That is more production than Texas and Louisiana combined.

Granted it isn't the be all to end all, but ten and a half billion barrels at seventy dollars a barrel is not an inconsiderable chunk of change to inject into our economy.

BSmack wrote: So even drilling in ANWAR won't reduce the price of oil.

mvscal wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:You're a dumbass.

Is that supposed to be your answer?

mvscal wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:So, you're saying increased crime and rampant poverty is OK, just as long as "you get yours?"

Sounds serious. Let me know when something like that starts happening.

Dinsdale wrote:So, you're saying increased crime and rampant poverty is OK, just as long as "you get yours?" Americans living in the streets is OK, as long as 100 guys "get theirs?"

I see we agree on something -- you're a selfish POS. And you are clearly NOT a Good American.

GOOD Americans (and good people in general) care about the well-being of others, not just themselves. You do not. Ergo...you get the picture.

Diego in Seattle wrote:

mvscal wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:So, you're saying increased crime and rampant poverty is OK, just as long as "you get yours?"

Sounds serious. Let me know when something like that starts happening.

Take off your bukake-covered glasses & you might start seeing it.

mvscal wrote: 1.4 million barrels a day actually would "put a dent" in our dependence on foreign oil. That is more production than Texas and Louisiana combined.

Tom In VA wrote:

Diego in Seattle wrote:

mvscal wrote: Sounds serious. Let me know when something like that starts happening.

Take off your bukake-covered glasses & you might start seeing it.

Get off your ass and quit with the rhetoric and you might start doing something about it. Bitching and moaning about it and hoping other people will, doesn't count.

m2 wrote:

mvscal wrote: 1.4 million barrels a day actually would "put a dent" in our dependence on foreign oil. That is more production than Texas and Louisiana combined.

Hey shit for brains...

What guarantees can you give us that this (Alaskan) oil won't be shipped abroad like all the other oil outta Alaska, so the oil companies can make more of a record setting profit?

What makes your tiny little pea-brain think... that oil won't be sold to the Chinese to make more oil executives $100 million a year?

You truly are a dipshit.


m2

Diego in Seattle wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:

Diego in Seattle wrote: Take off your bukake-covered glasses & you might start seeing it.

Get off your ass and quit with the rhetoric and you might start doing something about it. Bitching and moaning about it and hoping other people will, doesn't count.

I'm far from being in poverty. I just have the ability to see beyond myself (and it's really not that hard to do).

The republican party's inability to recognize the increasing gap between the rich & working poor is going to be their downfall.

I just have the ability to see beyond myself (and it's really not that hard to do).

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:

mvscal wrote:1.4 million barrels a day actually would "put a dent" in our dependence on foreign oil. That is more production than Texas and Louisiana combined.

Granted it isn't the be all to end all, but ten and a half billion barrels at seventy dollars a barrel is not an inconsiderable chunk of change to inject into our economy.

So even drilling in ANWAR won't reduce the price of oil.

Who said it would? Sissyblo?

mvscal wrote:

m2 wrote:What guarantees can you give us that this (Alaskan) oil won't be shipped abroad

That would depend on the quality of crude. I wouldn't expect that there would be much demand for heavy sour crude in the US with our specific regulatory requirements.

In any event, it's completely irrelevant to my point. ANWAR would be revenue going to American corporations employing American workers and paying American taxes and dividends to American shareholders.

There is 700 billion dollars just sitting in ground there. What the fuck are we waiting for?

mvscal wrote:

m2 wrote:What guarantees can you give us that this (Alaskan) oil won't be shipped abroad

That would depend on the quality of crude. I wouldn't expect that there would be much demand for heavy sour crude in the US with our specific regulatory requirements.

In any event, it's completely irrelevant to my point. ANWAR would be revenue going to American corporations employing American workers and paying American taxes and dividends to American shareholders.

There is 700 billion dollars just sitting in ground there. What the fuck are we waiting for?

Note; This letter refers to existing Alaskan Crude Oil production, not to exploration proposed by the Bush administration in the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR).



The Honorable George W. Bush
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to urge you to use your authority to ban the export of Alaskan North Slope (ANS) crude oil. Since the ban on exports of ANS crude oil was lifted in 1996, our constituents have consistently paid higher prices at the pump than other areas of the country, and, for the past several years, they have been subject to some of the highest gasoline prices in the nation. We urge you to take this action to protect West Coast consumers from West Coast oil supply shortages and higher gasoline prices.

A recent article in The Oregonian newspaper provides troubling evidence that BP Amoco pic exported ANS crude oil to reduce available supply on the West Coast and raise prices. This article quoted from previously secret company documents that show BP exported ANS crude oil to Asia even though the company obtained less profit on exported oil than it did selling this same oil in West Coast markets. According to the article, these actions were part of a strategy to restrict West Coast supply and obtain even higher profits on its West Coast sales. Further, The Oregonian turned up evidence that BP sold oil at higher prices to smaller West Coast refineries that had no competitive alternative to ANS crude oil than it did to other larger refineries that could more easily refine other types of oil. The evidence uncovered by The Oregonian indicates the export of ANS crude oil may in fact be one of the reasons for the higher prices West Coast consumers have paid over the past several years.

Although BP is not currently exporting ANS crude oil for its own business reasons, there is no legal restriction that prevents BP or other companies involved in ANS production from resuming exports in the future. Given the evidence that these exports caused or contributed to oil price increases that have harmed West Coast consumers, we urge you to take immediate action to prevent any future West Coast oil supply shortages or price increases from ANS crude oil exports.

Thank you for your attention to these serious concerns.
Sincerely,

RON WYDEN
United States Senator

GORDON SMITH
United States Senator

BARBARA BOXER
United States Senator

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:If drilling in ANWAR isn't supposed to reduce the price of oil, why are we even bothering?

It's the economy, stupid.

mvscal wrote:

Diego in Seattle wrote:

mvscal wrote: Sounds serious. Let me know when something like that starts happening.

Take off your bukake-covered glasses & you might start seeing it.

I guess your perspective would be rather limited when your head is stuck up your ass.

Back in the real world, the crime rate is dropping, the unemployment rate is less than 5% and we enjoy the fastest rate of economic growth of any fully industrialized nation on the planet.

mvscal wrote:
Market place regulation is what fucked everything up in the first fucking place.

Congress reauthorized what were supposed to be temporary price controls from the Nixon administration from 1973 to 1979 or 80. Carter, for some inexplicable reason, decided to replace these price controls with a windfall profits tax and it knocked the bottom out of our domestic energy market and has left us in thrall to foreign producers to this day.

Carter Tried To Stop Bush's Energy Disasters - 28 Years Ago
by Thom Hartmann

In his recent news conference, George Bush Jr. suggested that our nation's "problem" with high gasoline prices was caused by the lack of a national energy policy, and tried to blame it all on Bill Clinton. First, Junior said, "This is a problem that's been a long time in coming. We haven't had an energy policy in this country."
This was followed by, "That's exactly what I've been saying to the American people -- 10 years ago if we'd had an energy strategy, we would be able to diversify away from foreign dependence. And -- but we haven't done that. And now we find ourselves in the fix we're in." As is so often the case, Bush was lying.

Consider President Jimmy Carter's April 18, 1977 speech. Since it was given nearly three decades ago, when many of the reporters in Bush's White House were children, it's understandable that they don't remember it. But it's inexcusable that Bush and the mainstream media (which, after all, has the ability to do research) would completely ignore it. It was the speech that established the strategic petroleum reserve, birthed the modern solar power industry, led to the insulation of millions of American homes, and established America's first national energy policy. "With the exception of preventing war," said Jimmy Carter, a man of peace, "this is the greatest challenge our country will face during our lifetimes."

He added: "It is a problem we will not solve in the next few years, and it is likely to get progressively worse through the rest of this century. "We must not be selfish or timid if we hope to have a decent world for our children and grandchildren.

"We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us." Carter bluntly pointed out that: "The most important thing about these proposals is that the alternative may be a national catastrophe. Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation." He called the new energy policy he was proposing, "[T]he 'moral equivalent of war' -- except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not destroy..."

and most telling:

The year 1977 was a turning point for America. If we didn't make clear and rapid progress, we would face painful times ahead. The Saudis would have their fingers around our necks. We'd face war in the Middle East to secure future oil supplies. "Now we have a choice," Carter said. "But if we wait, we will live in fear of embargoes. We could endanger our freedom as a sovereign nation to act in foreign affairs."

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0503-22.htm

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:So the government should take land that has been set aside as a national trust and give it over for the benefit of a few people?

Give it over?!? I don't think so. They can buy or lease.

With no corresponding benefit to the taxpayers as a whole?

Besides increased tax revenue and employment? Also what benefit are the "taxpayers as a whole" deriving from the current usage of ANWAR? Be precise, please.

...and with the best of intentions, Carter's bumbling efforts to avoid dependence on foreign energy did absolutely nothing except accelerate the trend towards towards that dependency.

Good job, dumbfuck.

mvscal wrote:It will provide income not only to the fat cats and the employees, but also thousands of smaller shareholders such as myself...

mvscal wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:fouling the wildlife reserve

Save it.

I've seen the pictures of where they are proposing to drill. It's a fucking shithole on the ass end of nowhere.

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:

mvscal wrote: Save it.

I've seen the pictures of where they are proposing to drill. It's a fucking shithole on the ass end of nowhere.

Eskimos call it home.

Are you a fucking moron or what? Eskimos want the project to move forward for many different reasons not the least of which is the fact that they are shareholders of the mineral rights for that particular dirt patch.

Dinsdale wrote:

Wolfman wrote:I hear not one single person in DC
calling for even a temporary repeal of taxes
at the pumps !!

Probably because that would be moronic beyond words.

Serious question -- where, exactly, would the money come from to do road maintainence?

Eskimos want the project to move forward for many different reasons not the least of which is the fact that they are shareholders of the mineral rights for that particular dirt patch.

Alaska recovers 12.5 percent of all oil revenues generated within its borders and distributes them evenly among its residents, regardless of age.

Last year, each Alaska resident received $919.84 in oil returns. For a family of four, that means an additional $3,679 in disposable income.

Don't think for a minute that only Natives would benefit.

BSmack wrote:

mvscal wrote:It will provide income not only to the fat cats and the employees, but also thousands of smaller shareholders such as myself...

You have to love the argument to toss the fat cats a loaf of bread and hope that some crumbs hit hit the floor where the little brown mice are hiding out.