Saudis tell Bush to go F himself

[Sketch Soland]

I'm just hoping that the Saudis stop drilling - because for far too long - they have been hurting the habitat of the Arabian sand flea. How their Senators and Representatives get re-elected without bending over for the Green vote, I will never understand...

 

The ARABIAN SAND FLEA will be HEARD!

[Chilly]

So today our House of Representatives passes a bill to sue OPEC countries that are "limiting oil supply". WTF!

 

I'm sure it has nothing to do with our weak dollar and the fact that we are consuming like crack fiends. Think about this- they have the oil, we are addicted to it (as are other countries) and so they are able to charge more. If Sam the crack fiend wants his drugs, but Habib and Bruce Lee are also becoming addicted and have more cash to spend, he can raise his prices.

 

This election year posturing is too much. What our Congress needs to do is stop mortgaging our future by slowing spending. The blame everyone else first line of defense is getting old. We as a nation are being forced to lie in the sh------- bed that we made for ourselves. Yet, these assclown's aren't willing to discuss solutions, they just want to be able to blame and sue someone. Fuggin lawyers...

 

When the !@#$ are we going to wake up?

 

Wait, I thought you were supporting McCain.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

So today our House of Representatives passes a bill to sue OPEC countries that are "limiting oil supply". WTF!

 

I'm sure it has nothing to do with our weak dollar and the fact that we are consuming like crack fiends. Think about this- they have the oil, we are addicted to it (as are other countries) and so they are able to charge more. If Sam the crack fiend wants his drugs, but Habib and Bruce Lee are also becoming addicted and have more cash to spend, he can raise his prices.

 

This election year posturing is too much. What our Congress needs to do is stop mortgaging our future by slowing spending. The blame everyone else first line of defense is getting old. We as a nation are being forced to lie in the sh------- bed that we made for ourselves. Yet, these assclown's aren't willing to discuss solutions, they just want to be able to blame and sue someone. Fuggin lawyers...

 

When the !@#$ are we going to wake up?

good points

 

maybe if we get the heck out of Iraq and stop spending a few hundred billion a year on that money sinkhole, we can begin to get spending undercontrol

[yall]

Wait, I thought you were supporting McCain.

 

Is supporting McCain mutually exclusive to wanting foreign oil independence or alternative energy sources?

 

I'm guessing he has the same standard Republican ties to big oil, but even hardline right-wingers are starting to come around to the notion that we need to start doing business differently if we wish to survive.

[Chilly]

Is supporting McCain mutually exclusive to wanting foreign oil independence or alternative energy sources?

 

I'm guessing he has the same standard Republican ties to big oil, but even hardline right-wingers are starting to come around to the notion that we need to start doing business differently if we wish to survive.

 

I was referring to this line: "What our Congress needs to do is stop mortgaging our future by slowing spending. "

[SD Jarhead]

Wait, I thought you were supporting McCain.

 

At this point, I will probably vote for McCain, but if he continues to push such 'great' ideas as the gas tax holiday, I may have a difficult time pulling the lever. I do believe that McCain will be able to reach across party lines much more so than Obama will to get things accomplished. He has a proven track record of doing so, hence his "Maverick" title.

 

As I've opined here before, conservatives better wake up and smell the coffee about conservation. Just because someone believes in conservation doesn't mean they're a hippie. But GW got it right this past weekend when he said that the people here screaming the loudest about gas and energy prices are the ones who are standing in the way of allowing us to become less dependent on foreign sources for our crack, er, oil.

 

Why the fug not open up ANWR? Why not start designing and building nuke power plants? It's not a total solution, but at least it's a start.

 

While I believe in the freedom to drive a huge SUV if you want to, I can't stand the arrogant boasting from many on the right about it being our God-given right to do so.

 

I was listening to an interview yesterday on the Michael Medved show of Fareed Zakhara (spelling?) and he brought up a good point about politics today and why our nation is so fukked up. He mentioned how back during the Reagan Presidency there was much more cooperation on key issues. Reagan and Tip O'Neal (again sp?) worked together on key issues like tax reform. We just don't see that today in the toxic political environment we have.

[Chilly]

At this point, I will probably vote for McCain, but if he continues to push such 'great' ideas as the gas tax holiday, I may have a difficult time pulling the lever. I do believe that McCain will be able to reach across party lines much more so than Obama will to get things accomplished. He has a proven track record of doing so, hence his "Maverick" title.

 

As I've opined here before, conservatives better wake up and smell the coffee about conservation. Just because someone believes in conservation doesn't mean they're a hippie. But GW got it right this past weekend when he said that the people here screaming the loudest about gas and energy prices are the ones who are standing in the way of allowing us to become less dependent on foreign sources for our crack, er, oil.

 

Why the fug not open up ANWR? Why not start designing and building nuke power plants? It's not a total solution, but at least it's a start.

 

While I believe in the freedom to drive a huge SUV if you want to, I can't stand the arrogant boasting from many on the right about it being our God-given right to do so.

 

I was listening to an interview yesterday on the Michael Medved show of Fareed Zakhara (spelling?) and he brought up a good point about politics today and why our nation is so fukked up. He mentioned how back during the Reagan Presidency there was much more cooperation on key issues. Reagan and Tip O'Neal (again sp?) worked together on key issues like tax reform. We just don't see that today in the toxic political environment we have.

 

As far as ANWAR [sic], from everything I've read, it won't make any impact on prices whatsoever, and there is hardly enough oil there to sustain us for very long.

[stuckincincy]

As far as ANWAR [sic], from everything I've read, it won't make any impact on prices whatsoever, and there is hardly enough oil there to sustain us for very long.

 

What do you base that on?

 

BTW - this has begun - the Chinese are starting drilling operations for the Cubans in the Gulf of Mexico. Nice, eh?

 

http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/econo..._cuba/index.htm

Edited May 21, 2008 by stuckincincy

[Chilly]

what do you base that on?

 

A study that I read in one of my classes (don't have a link - was in a packet).

[SD Jarhead]

As far as ANWAR [sic], from everything I've read, it won't make any impact on prices whatsoever, and there is hardly enough oil there to sustain us for very long.

 

So we shouldn't do it at all? Should we just say the hell with it? I don't get that logic.

 

The whole Carribou argument is pure BS from the enviro-nazis.

[Chilly]

So we shouldn't do it at all? Should we just say the hell with it? I don't get that logic.

 

The whole Carribou argument is pure BS from the enviro-nazis.

 

Basically, yes. If we aren't really going to get any benefits out of it, why do it?

[SD Jarhead]

Agreed, if there were suspected to be no benefits.

 

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

 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2002/fs045-02/

[Chilly]

Yes, I'm aware of their estimates that there would be a couple billion barrels of oil at a cheaper cost. Without the impact to overall costs, nor the ability to sustain us very far, whats the benefit?

[SD Jarhead]

I think the benefit is obvious, it's less than we would need to get from overseas sources. Additionally, it would take ~9 years to even see the first drop.

 

My question to you is what is the cost?

 

Surely we're never going to gain total energy independence from solar energy, so why even do it...right? That's how I read your response. Why are you so against tapping domestic resources? Aren't you someone who wants us out of Iraq and the Gulf? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Sketch Soland]

I think the benefit is obvious, it's less than we would need to get from overseas sources. Additionally, it would take ~9 years to even see the first drop.

 

My question to you is what is the cost?

 

Surely we're never going to gain total energy independence from solar energy, so why even do it...right? That's how I read your response. Why are you so against tapping domestic resources? Aren't you someone who wants us out of Iraq and the Gulf? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

It does not logically follow that IF someone wants us out of Iraq, THEN they MUST support the drilling you speak of. One can be a proponent of either option without necessitating the other.

 

No matter how much oil is down there domestically, the strategic vector that will lead us to greater energy independence will not flow through domestic drilling. That is obvious. Domestic drilling is a band-aid for a severed limb.

[Alaska Darin]

Yes, I'm aware of their estimates that there would be a couple billion barrels of oil at a cheaper cost. Without the impact to overall costs, nor the ability to sustain us very far, whats the benefit?

Jobs.

[Sketch Soland]

Jobs.

 

Fair enough.

 

But, still, a band-aid.

[Chilly]

It does not logically follow that IF someone wants us out of Iraq, THEN they MUST support the drilling you speak of. One can be a proponent of either option without necessitating the other.

 

No matter how much oil is down there domestically, the strategic vector that will lead us to greater energy independence will not flow through domestic drilling. That is obvious. Domestic drilling is a band-aid for a severed limb.

 

^^ - Pretty much how I feel about it.

 

I would think that there is going to be a ton of money involved in just getting the infrastructure up and running, and that much of this cost is going to be handled by the government. I know that there have been fights about budget proposals in previous years due to ANWR, and that it was included in there somewhere (though I'm not sure what the actual costs would add up to).

 

With it not being a long-term solution, not really fixing much of anything, whats the point of spending the money?

 

I also think both sides' positions on the environmental issues is likely way overstated (that it would completely kill the environment for the left, and that it wouldn't have any impact from some of the people that are supporting it).

 

 

 

Jobs.

 

It would definitely be a boost for Alaska. However, is that your reason for supporting the drilling? I thought you weren't a big fan of government spending money to create jobs.

[SD Jarhead]

It does not logically follow that IF someone wants us out of Iraq, THEN they MUST support the drilling you speak of. One can be a proponent of either option without necessitating the other.

 

No matter how much oil is down there domestically, the strategic vector that will lead us to greater energy independence will not flow through domestic drilling. That is obvious. Domestic drilling is a band-aid for a severed limb.

 

I agree with you that if you feel one way about Iraq then you must be against drilling in ANWR, but most people I'm familiar with who want us out of there do not support drilling because of party dogma .

 

Using your analogy, then what is the answer for reattaching the limb?

 

Certainly there isn't a single solution, I've never suggested that. But tell me why so many are not in favor of at least developing that area. Because of the Caribou? Give me a fuggin break!

 

Many have picked up the Democratic talking point and have no idea why.

[Sketch Soland]

I agree with you that they are not mutually exclusive, but most people I'm familiar with who want us out of there do not support drilling in ANWR because of idealogical dogma .

 

Using your analogy, then what is the answer for reattaching the limb?

 

Certainly there isn't a single solution, I've never suggested that. But tell me why so many are not in favor of at least developing that area. Because of the Caribou? Give me a fuggin break!

 

Many have picked up the Democratic talking point and have no idea why.

 

Why many are not in favor, it seems, is because the cost of getting the oil out will not be worth the amount that seems to be available. Couple this questionable cost/benefit economic analysis with "environmental concerns" (whatever those are, specifically, I'm not sure) and you have a recipe for political DOA.

 

As to the answer for reattaching the limb: there, of course, is not one magic cure-all answer. But the strategic thrust of developing energy independence must be in developing new energy sources that could eventually replace oil. Of course, even if one is developed overnight, that's not going to change things on the short term. But the reality is is that we are up sh-- creek without a paddle in the short term when it comes to oil prices. Nothing much is going to change that, other than an unexpected and sudden drastic reduction in demand.

[Alaska Darin]

It would definitely be a boost for Alaska. However, is that your reason for supporting the drilling? I thought you weren't a big fan of government spending money to create jobs.

The government doesn't spend money on drilling. Virtually the entire bill is footed privately (permitting, etc) and it's VERY costly. And the boost as far as jobs go is far greater for the lower 48 because the things required aren't made in Alaska.

 

The downstream effect is gigantic. Worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Plus the government gets $.18 a gallon...

[KD in CA]

Yes, I'm aware of their estimates that there would be a couple billion barrels of oil at a cheaper cost. Without the impact to overall costs, nor the ability to sustain us very far, whats the benefit?

 

The private sector will decide if it's worth the effort or not. I trust the marketplace to make a more intelligent decision than a handful of scumbags in Washington who want to make sure the hippie vote stays in their pocket.

 

Plus, do we really know how much is down there? Where's Fan in Chicago?

[Chilly]

The private sector will decide if it's worth the effort or not. I trust the marketplace to make a more intelligent decision than a handful of scumbags in Washington who want to make sure the hippie vote stays in their pocket.

 

Plus, do we really know how much is down there? Where's Fan in Chicago?

 

Yeah, from my understanding the gubmint was going to pick up a lot of the costs. If what Darin said was correct (need to do some research), I don't have a problem with it.

[Alaska Darin]

The private sector will decide if it's worth the effort or not. I trust the marketplace to make a more intelligent decision than a handful of scumbags in Washington who want to make sure the hippie vote stays in their pocket.

 

Plus, do we really know how much is down there? Where's Fan in Chicago?

USGS says between 6 and 16 BBL in the 1002 area. Plus between 33 and 100 TRILLION Cubic Feet of Natural Gas.

[SD Jarhead]

Yeah, from my understanding the gubmint was going to pick up a lot of the costs. If what Darin said was correct (need to do some research), I don't have a problem with it.

 

Here's my point BF, at first blush you were not in favor of it and really didn't know why. That is the stance of so many people that it's sad. The whole issue is a political football and the Democrats won't consider drilling there for mostly political purposes. We've all agreed this is not a silver bullet for our energy crisis (which it is becoming quickly), but it is but one of many steps we can take to lessen our dependence on foreign energy sources.

 

 

Now folks need to see the issue for what it is, another example of our fukking politicians not doing whats right for the country, but what's right for them and/or their party.

[Chilly]

Here's my point BF, at first blush you were not in favor of it and really didn't know why. That is the stance of so many people that it's sad. The whole issue is a political football and the Democrats won't consider drilling there for mostly political purposes. We've all agreed this is not a silver bullet for our energy crisis (which it is becoming quickly), but it is but one of many steps we can take to lessen our dependence on foreign energy sources.

 

 

Now folks need to see the issue for what it is, another example of our fukking politicians not doing whats right for the country, but what's right for them and/or their party.

 

Uh, what? I knew perfectly why I was against it (which I wouldn't be if AD is correct and not what I got from previous information).

[erynthered]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/0...mocrats_co.html

 

 

 

Senator Chuck Schumer claims that coercing Saudi Arabia to increase oil production by 1 million barrels a day would drop the per barrel price by $25, saving Americans 62 cent per gallon at the gas pump. Yet, somehow, that same amount of oil coming from Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would only ease oil prices by a penny.

 

In a Senate floor speech he gave on May 13^th, the New York Democrat insisted that:

"If Saudi Arabia were to increase its production by 1 million barrels per day that translates to a reduction of 20 percent to 25 percent in the world price of crude oil, and crude oil prices could fall by more than $25 dollar per barrel from its current level of $126 per barrel. In turn, that would lower the price of gasoline between 13 percent and 17 percent, or by more than 62 cents off the expected summer regular-grade price - offering much needed relief to struggling families. "

Schumer repeated these words almost verbatim when grilling oil company executives during yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.

Yet Schumer's daily magic number of 1 million barrels is the exact increase experts believe we would today be pumping through the Alyeska pipeline had Bill Clinton not vetoed ANWR drilling back in 1995. And even the most rabid anti-domestic-drilling Democrats don't take issue with that figure.

So then, the increase he demands of "Bush's friends," the Saudis - which he claims would reduce prices by up to 25 percent -- is the exact amount he argued earlier this month would only "reduce the price of oil by a penny" were it coming from ANWR - eco-sacred breeding ground of the Porcupine Caribou.

It doesn't take a Ph.D in economics to know that both figures can't be right.

Nor one in Poli-Sci to know why they're so starkly different nonetheless

[DC Tom]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/0...mocrats_co.html

 

That's because it's illegal to coerce Eskimos. But nobody gives a sh-- about sand !@#$s.

[Alaska Darin]

"ANWR would also provide substantial revenues. Oil companies would have to pay rent for leasing rights, royalties on each barrel produced, and corporate income taxes on their profits. The Congressional Research Service estimates that, based on current oil prices, over $112 billion in revenues would be accrued by the federal government, $36 billion from leasing and royalty revenues and $76 billion from tax revenues."

 

Congressional Research Service memorandum, “Possible Federal Tax Revenues From Oil Development at ANWR,” April 27, 2006, p. 2.

 

That says nothing of LNG production/pipeline.

[Nanker]

That's because it's illegal to coerce Eskimos. But nobody gives a sh-- about sand !@#$s.

 

Oh NO! You said the "E" word!

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

ANWR saves 75 cents and takes 10 yrs to deliver

 

If Congress were to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, crude oil prices would probably drop by an average of only 75 cents a barrel, according to Department of Energy projections issued Thursday.

.

.

It estimates that if Congress agreed to open ANWR this year, Alaskan oil could hit the market in about 10 years.

[Wacka]

ANWR saves 75 cents and takes 10 yrs to deliver

 

And if the f'n idiot Clinton would have allowed drilling, we'd be getting the oil now.

[Alaska Darin]

And if the f'n idiot Clinton would have allowed drilling, we'd be getting the oil now.

Amen.

[ExiledInIllinois]

And if the f'n idiot Clinton would have allowed drilling, we'd be getting the oil now.

 

So what. IMO, I view it like my coin jars at home... Almost everyday I add to the quarters, dimes, nickels, and penny jar... Heck the penny jar is now already a half filled 5 gallon water cooler bottle... Am I gonna go to "CoinStar" and cash them in? Heck no! For what under a grand? "A penny saved is a penny earned."

 

Like opening up ANWAR would have made difference... Gas would still be 4 bucks a gallon. Remember during the 2004 campaign when Kerry said that gas should or is going to be around $3.50 to $4.00 a gallon... He really got hammered and nailed to the cross... Where is it now?

 

Back to my coin... I am not going to cash it in even if I really need to. I am going to wait a real long time and do it when it is a luxury windfall!

[Alaska Darin]

Back to my coin... I am not going to cash it in even if I really need to. I am going to wait a real long time and do it when it is a luxury windfall!

Really smart. Why put it in something that earns interest when you can leave it in a glass jar and admire its shininess?

 

The Riddler is a gift that keeps on giving.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Really smart. Why put it in something that earns interest when you can leave it in a glass jar and admire its shininess?

 

The Riddler is a gift that keeps on giving.

 

True.

 

But, life isn't the perfect utopia that you envision it to be... A great sizable percentage (well over 25%) of my earnings go into interest bearing accounts... I am just not going to worry about the chump change... Again, I know that can add up.

 

Get over yourself and your way of trying to always maximize things... I am indifferent in this manner... You don't have to be perfect Darin... Just a compassionate giving heart that doesn't sacrifice your own personal financial (and other) protection...

 

You are way too uptight! Keep scratching and clawing, I know you will get to where you want to be!

[pBills]

And if the f'n idiot Clinton would have allowed drilling, we'd be getting the oil now.

 

 

 

Well I guess $3.25 is better than $4.00

[ExiledInIllinois]

Well I guess $3.25 is better than $4.00

 

 

Good point!

 

Have you ever been at the pump when they are adjusting the price on the computers... I saw it move $.35 in front of my eyes!

 

There wasn't even a fuel truck filling the tanks up... Which leads me to a tangent ... I NEVER fill my rig when the truck is filling the underground tanks... I just don't what all that crap being stirred up to somehow (probably low though) to enter my vehicle...

[blzrul]

Good point!

 

Have you ever been at the pump when they are adjusting the price on the computers... I saw it move $.35 in front of my eyes!

 

There wasn't even a fuel truck filling the tanks up... Which leads me to a tangent ... I NEVER fill my rig when the truck is filling the underground tanks... I just don't what all that crap being stirred up to somehow (probably low though) to enter my vehicle...

Buncha cars here got poison gas over the weekend - Shell refinery in Bellingham had a "water problem" and didn't catch it. Poor slobs paid $4 a gallon and most of their cars never made it out of the drive from the gas station. The exception was a Subaru, which went a mile. Guess that's my next car....

[ExiledInIllinois]

Buncha cars here got poison gas over the weekend - Shell refinery in Bellingham had a "water problem" and didn't catch it. Poor slobs paid $4 a gallon and most of their cars never made it out of the drive from the gas station. The exception was a Subaru, which went a mile. Guess that's my next car....

 

 

"Subaru, built cheap and meant to stay that way!"