Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When Newt Gingrich says "drill", he's usually talking about a young, female assistant. He knows a lot about that kind of drilling, nothing about drilling for petroleum.
When Newt Gingrich says "drill", he's usually talking about a young, female assistant. He knows a lot about that kind of drilling, nothing about drilling for petroleum.
And the thing is Newt gave a basic synopsis of it in his speech. Just releasing 1/3 of the reserves would take to task the speculators, which is the main reason why oil prices are rising. Not only that but investing in drilling could provide more jobs for people here in the US. So we get off our foreign oil dependency, reduce the cost of gas, provide jobs. Hmmmm, seems like a positive to me.
If drilling here would get us off foreign oil dependency then my car now flies in the air.
Nope, I know who Newt Gingrich is, the guy who broke the news to his wife that he was dumping her while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer treatments-the FAMILY VALUES Newt.
Also the guy who railed against the "philanderer" Bill Clinton while he was carrying on a multi-year affair with a young, hot assistant-the "eating ain't cheating" Newt Gingrich.
And you love this guy? I often disagree with your posts, but generally find them to be well thought out, so I'm assuming your 9 year old got on your computer today.
You must be a big fan of Larry Craig and Rudi Guilliani then.
If drilling were so great, why aren't the oil companies using the current offshore drilling leases that they already have. They are not drilling on a significant portion of the leased areas, which they should hit up before drilling in ANWAR.
People fall for some real nonsense! How about starting by regulating our commodities markets so we're not paying higher prices because of the likes of Enron-type look-alikes. On the one hand the oil execs say its all supply and demand and these prices are totally out of their control. On the other hand, the markets are causing this. So then I guess its NOT supply and demand. So which is it oil industry? Which response suits you better?
IMO, it doesn't seem like the oil industry will be saving the oil situation and our ever weakening economy for the American people. They are actually reaping record profits, one of them (forget which) having this past year earned the most profit of any corporation ever in American history.
Thanks for posting the link to the drill here drill now for all reasonable people to sign up. I signed it last month along with about 1 million other folks.
The majority of people polled DO want us to drill here. It only makes sense to do ALL we can do to reduce fuel costs and foreign dependence.
New Poll Shows 74 Percent of Americans Support Offshore Drilling
Does that mean we should do everything based on polls? A majority of people think we should get out of Iraq, is Newt in favor of following that poll?
A very high percentage of Americans beieve that "there is a shortage of refining capacity in the US, despite the oil companies telling congress that they have no interest expanding capacity. So maybe we shouldn't be that interested in what "a majority" beieve when it contradicts the facts.
Quote:
While estimates range on the degree to which oil futures trading is affecting the price of oil, there is broad consensus that it is playing a role.
But during the Enron induced electricity "shortage" in CA (in 2000?) Newt argued the opposite, that it wasn't and couldn't be speculation. A quicker answer to the speculation bubble is to outlaw "dark trading". That requires no exploration, no drilling, refining or transportation of oil.
Quote:
The very act of opening America's vast oil deposits for extraction would send an immediate signal to speculators that supply will be increased, and that betting on higher prices for oil is no longer a safe investment. Prices will fall as a result.
In the above two quotes he seems to be arguing that it's supply and demand and speculation. Since no one has been turned away at the well-head, no contracts have gone unfilled it doesn't seem to be supply. OTOH if he really wants to send an immediate signal (as if falling demand here and abroad hasn't already) he could advocate an Executive Order mandating a 62.5 MPH (100 K/H) speed limit on ALL interstates and US Highways. Despite what some on here argue that really does drop consumption. Granted it won't reduce total consumption but will reduce it by the amount caused by "highway speeds".
Quote:
Senator McCain Proposes a $300 Million Prize for a "Super" Car Battery
One of the solutions we've proposed at American Solutions for reducing our dependence on foreign oil and producing more American energy is offering prizes for innovative answers to our energy needs.
Another group has a prize (X prize??) for a high mileage car. I don't think it's produced a winner yet. While it might work the real weakness of the argument is in the line...
Quote:
When you think about it, prizes are the essence of the American way.
All I can say to that is YOU'VE GOT TO BE SH***ING ME!. I thought hard work and PROFIT were the essence of the American way. Do parents really tell their kids; forget about working hard, studying or anything like that, just try to get Wheel of Fortune of bette still, PLAY THE LOTTERY"?
Quote:
Rather than bloated, bureaucratic government programs that are black holes for tax dollars,
But McCain advocated a GOVERNMENT prize, wouldn't that be, de facto, a "bloated, government program"?
Quote:
prizes unleash the creative, entrepreneurial spirit that built this country.
No, PROFITS, guaranteed by the "government" (but not the bloated part apparently) patent protection, unleash the entrepreneurial spirit!
Quote:
That's why I am so pleased to see that Sen. John McCain has proposed a $300 million prize for the individual who can develop a "super" car battery that can power cars more cheaply and with less harm to the environment.
But what if someone developed an engine that ran off the hot air coming out of Newt Gingrich, or a way to make a solar collecting panel that produced electricity so efficiently that it would be a 1,000 fold increase in what we've got now. "No prize for you", it's not a "battery"
Quote:
Congratulations to Sen. McCain for his faith in the ingenuity of the American people.
Any crude extraced in new oil fields will be added to the world supply. We would have to come up with one he!! of alot of oil to really impact the price of a barrel. I think peak oil argues that there just isnt that much oil left in American reserves. Getting Iraqi oil fields fully productive would help immensely and maybe you could trick the speculators into backing off on investing and driving up the price. I think we are at the point where supply will always be decreasing and demand increasing driving the price of oil higher. I thought we learned this lesson 30 years ago but apparently not. We need to develop alternatives now and my bet is no Hydrogen fuel cells
At the same time I say we crank up as much coal fired energy as we possible can. We have lots of the stuff and it would reduce demand and drive down prices on crude and NG.
China *****tin all over the world and getting rich is p1ss1n me off
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
