AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Drill, Baby, Drill
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
As they say in Texas: “If all you ever do is all you’ve ever done, then all you’ll ever get is all you ever got.”

Quote:Imagine for a minute that attending the Republican convention in St. Paul, sitting in a skybox overlooking the convention floor, were observers from Russia, Iran and Venezuela. And imagine for a minute what these observers would have been doing when Rudy Giuliani led the delegates in a chant of “drill, baby, drill!”

I’ll tell you what they would have been doing: the Russian, Iranian and Venezuelan observers would have been up out of their seats, exchanging high-fives and joining in the chant louder than anyone in the hall — “Yes! Yes! Drill, America, drill!” — because an America that is focused first and foremost on drilling for oil is an America more focused on feeding its oil habit than kicking it.

Why would Republicans, the party of business, want to focus our country on breathing life into a 19th-century technology — fossil fuels — rather than giving birth to a 21st-century technology — renewable energy? As I have argued before, it reminds me of someone who, on the eve of the I.T. revolution — on the eve of PCs and the Internet — is pounding the table for America to make more I.B.M. typewriters and carbon paper. “Typewriters, baby,typewriters.”

Of course, we’re going to need oil for many years, but instead of exalting that — with “drill, baby, drill” — why not throw all our energy into innovating a whole new industry of clean power with the mantra “invent, baby, invent?” That is what a party committed to “change” would really be doing.

Thomas Friedman's NYT article
Friedman/NY Times playing politics here? Say it ain't so Joe?! Forget the fact that the S&Gs have been pushing a "Holistic" approach, which not only includes drilling, BUT allowing the industry to promote and develop more alternatives. Forget the fact that throwing taxpayer money at what the State thinks should be done, is usually the opposite of what eventually gets done anyway.

Oh well, so much for objectivity. But only the ignorant still think that the NYTs is objective anyway.
mr_yak Wrote:The "party of change" will be allowing a vote today. ... so much for mantras.

It's still got that 50 mile limit, which really sucks. What they are trying to do is get off the hook, and still have the least espensive areas out of bounds. If the S&Gs balk, they will be able to point fingers and bray like stuck.....................Jackasses.

That would mean that the S&Gs would have to do something they are not good at doing. They would have to get a stiff back and have the guts to get out and tell everyone about the reason for not going along with the Hobson's Choice the Jackasses were attempting to force on them.

I am not hopeful for that happening. I need to get out my Dr Thomas Sowell quote.

Who says that there is no difference between the political parties? When Democrats are criticized, they counter-attack. When Republicans are criticized, they whine that they are innocent.-Dr Thomas Sowell
CSM figures the deal is not going to get done. Allowing a vote only to have "the plan" scuttled is only going to heap more egg on Pelosi's face. It'll be interesting to see if they are as S&G as you believe John. I'm thinking 50-50 odds. Haven't heard too much more on the way the wind is blowing. I guess we might find out by the end of the day ... maybe.
mr_yak Wrote:CSM figures the deal is not going to get done. Allowing a vote only to have "the plan" scuttled is only going to heap more egg on Pelosi's face. It'll be interesting to see if they are as S&G as you believe John. I'm thinking 50-50 odds. Haven't heard too much more on the way the wind is blowing. I guess we might find out by the end of the day ... maybe.

Nothing becomes law, until it goes to the senate, and is signed by the president. The odds of legislation before the election are not all that good, unless the Jackasses REALLY want to get this off the election plate.
Quote:Foremost among these are big caveats top Democrats want in return for relaxing a decades-old moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling in most US waters, including rolling back $17 billion in tax breaks for Big Oil and cutting states out of any royalties from new lease sales off their coasts.

This alone is grounds for not passing. The states should have the ability to reap some of the benefits of their own land. In fact cutting them out would most surely be unconstitutional.
I haven't seen a peep on the outcome ... and it has to be past close of business for those yahoos. I'm thinking that it's stuck. Ya think they'll try tomorrow? The way H.R.6899 was trotted out in the dead of night does not bode well for getting a quick knock off. And Pelsoi is too busy telling everyone who will listen that the economy is "not her fault" to be much of a ramrod today.

Has anybody heard anything more about voting on this turkey of a bill?

Apparently the greenies are applying lots of pressure to kill it off. Also a policy statement from the Audubon society complaining about "messy" oil drilling technology. I'm thinking this one is turkey is DOA.
John L Wrote:Oh well, so much for objectivity. But only the ignorant still think that the NYTs is objective anyway.

Only the ignorant would assume a mainstream publication is capable of objectivity.

The key point in this article is that oil should become and is set to become a secondary resource, the shift away from fossil fuels ought to be the GOP's focus (which I do not believe it is).
... well it's official ... the party of "change" has changed it's tune to Drill, Baby, Drill! ... sort of ... with some crappy caveats that John pointed out yesterday. BTW John, the S&Gs voted against what Boehner describes as a "hoax" ... but they're the minority party so what can they really do about it?? Particularly when it's conjured overnight and rammed down their throats the next day?

The deal cutting out the states from revenues seems like fertile ground for litigation. It's a smoke screen and most people will recognize it as such ... except possibly for the eco-whachos that have been alienated in the process.

Now off to the Senate ... are there any big kids in the Senate that stand a chance of killing off this turkey?? Shock
The "Drill, Baby, Drill" Messiah won't talk to the media "until she's treated with respect and deference" according to her own words. Gone Bananas, evidently.

Found a nice picture of her,
[Image: 2008-09-17-sarahstylist.jpg]
note her extraordinary sense of style.
quadrat Wrote:...won't talk to the media "until she's treated with respect and deference" according to her own words.

I have to agree, here.

To expect the left-meaning media to treat one with respect an deference is definitely an unreasonable expectation.

:lol:
[Image: HarperGeorge-is-so-handsome.png]

Canada is in the midst of a federal election that is just as dirty as the one going on south of us.
JohnWho Wrote:
quadrat Wrote:...won't talk to the media "until she's treated with respect and deference" according to her own words.

I have to agree, here.

To expect the left-meaning media to treat one with respect an deference is definitely an unreasonable expectation.

:lol:

Katie Couric is no longer a part of the media??! Has anybody told her? Shock
Well, she is no longer part of NBC, that's for sure.
Well, a whole lot of feminist organisations endorse Obama aggressively now, not seen since Ferraro's Veep candidacy in 1984. They spit on Palin.

Quote:Via a press conference today, the Feminist Majority PAC, National Organization for Women PAC, Business and Professional Women/PAC, National Association of Social Workers PACE, National Congress of Black Women, and the Women's Information Network officially endorse Barack Obama for President.

"We don't think it's much to break a glass ceiling for one woman and leave millions of women behind."
http://www.feministing.com/archives/011083.html

They have realised that Palin's very purpose is to leave them behind.

Anyway, McCain enjoys greater approval amongst white woman than Obama. The surprising fact however is, McCain also enjoys greater approval amongst them than Palin. The issue Palin is fading, displaced by the economic troubles.
quadrat Wrote:The surprising fact however is, McCain also enjoys greater approval amongst them than Palin.

They find him sexier than Palin. Not surprising, pretty reasonable for heteros.

Quote:The issue Palin is fading, displaced by the economic troubles.

Yes, the bounce seems to be over. According to Gallup, Osama is ahead again, and with the economic scares, we probably will see President Hussein in less than two months....S2
John L Wrote:Nothing becomes law, until it goes to the senate, and is signed by the president. The odds of legislation before the election are not all that good, unless the Jackasses REALLY want to get this off the election plate.

What about things that that become un-law?
mv, you seem excited by the prospect of Obama being president...
So we're talking about 25K bpd here in sanctions. [Probably less] This would seem to be low hanging fruit. Will Trump pull the trigger after today's ... and I have to double quote this ... ""vote"". ....? Disruption to supply ... virtually nill. Incentive for domestic production ... positive. Ability to infuriate leftist ... pretty much ... so what will we hear next week?
Pages: 1 2