|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 12:27:33 GMT -5
I haven't changed anything gaffney.....you are "cherry picking", another ploy to avoid the real issue here. If you guys can veer the conversation to blame in order to keep the focus off of bush, the right, his crony neocons......there is a target and her name is Pelosi. If, she is indeed guilty, can one woman cause this crisis? I think not. Your are correct, but, one woman can lead the cause that brought us down this path. Extreme environmentalism, the cash cow of the left. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 12:29:57 GMT -5
He is the president and she is only the speaker...no sexism here  Well, then she is firmly to blame then, as she is speaker over the most powerful branch of our government. Yet, her actions are inaction where the energy crisis is concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 12:32:37 GMT -5
He lifted the ban to drill on our coasts. There is allocated land for drilling, but they want more land. Why haven't they drilled on the allotted land? Since 9/11, our economy has taken a downturn regardless of the cic's brain washing lies that we are doing fine. The speaker isn't losing support, because since 2006, she never had it. Although the Republicans lost some seats and their majority inCongress, none of them supported the speaker, so what's new? They giver her more support then the Democrats did Gingrich. They spent their entire time digging up dirt on him, in the form of sexual affairs. But, out of the other side of their mouth said sex was not an issue, where Clinton was concerned. Now who really wants it both ways? |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 12:35:35 GMT -5
"We await with bated breath"?.....don't you mean "you" await? What I am suggesting is while this thread was started to point fingers at Pelosi, and her real agenda, I am saying that she will not just giveaway money as was done in the past, hence our current dilemma. The so-called energy crisis is just that.....just like the one created in California with Enron (bush crony). We are not pointing fingers, we are discussing her agenda. However, you keep trying to take the thread off track. Why is the President treated with more disdain then the leader of the most powerful branch of government, Nancy Pelosi? |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 12:40:28 GMT -5
Gaffney, there is no evasion on my part at all.....merely common sense. If anyone is in a pickle, it is the country with a poor economy. A poor economy brought on, not by a war, but by a lack of a comprehensive energy policy and a downturn in an over inflated housing market. A housing market created by the very person Obama has working as his campaign finance manager. Yep, Penny made a bundle on that failed housing market, so Obama definitely wants that crook on his payroll. |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Aug 25, 2008 15:20:14 GMT -5
A poor economy brought on, not by a war, but by a lack of a comprehensive energy policy and a downturn in an over inflated housing market. A housing market created by the very person Obama has working as his campaign finance manager. Yep, Penny made a bundle on that failed housing market, so Obama definitely wants that crook on his payroll. The real villans in the housing crisis are the Dems in Congress who threatened the mortgage lenders of "redlining" - not making enough loans in economically depressed areas. There was never a law passed - just the threat of one. As a result of the overt threats from the Democrats in Congress, the lenders loosened the rules and started making loans that they really shouldn't have made. We can all see the results today. However, like any good politician that creates a mess on the floor, the Dems are now running around, yelling that "something has to be done!" |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Aug 25, 2008 18:27:13 GMT -5
A poor economy brought on, not by a war, but by a lack of a comprehensive energy policy and a downturn in an over inflated housing market. A housing market created by the very person Obama has working as his campaign finance manager. Yep, Penny made a bundle on that failed housing market, so Obama definitely wants that crook on his payroll. The real villans in the housing crisis are the Dems in Congress who threatened the mortgage lenders of "redlining" - not making enough loans in economically depressed areas. There was never a law passed - just the threat of one. As a result of the overt threats from the Democrats in Congress, the lenders loosened the rules and started making loans that they really shouldn't have made. We can all see the results today. However, like any good politician that creates a mess on the floor, the Dems are now running around, yelling that "something has to be done!" That is correct. And, Penny Pritzker was one of the primary people in charge of the changes that were made in the housing loan market and the sub-prime lending that led to the collapse. She is also a member of one of the richest families in the United States of America, the Pritzker family of Chicago.  Just look at those pearls. Now, how does she fit in with middle America? She doesn't, and it makes me wonder why Obama, the liar, tells us he is for middle America. Well, he's not. His past clearly shows he is all for Obama. |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 25, 2008 20:45:47 GMT -5
So there is no oil on the alloted land for oil? I suppose they already drilled? I don't think so, unless you can show some proof and if there is no oil, why don't they sell, make money and invest in other countries the way they do ours. AS for world supply & demand, why are we short changing our own resources and allowing ourselves to be screwed? I thought the US was the most powerful and wise, yet, what you are implying is that the US has no business sense. We are being hijacked with the worlds' demands.
As for our poor economy, Clinton came into the WH having to fix the deficit that bush 41 left us with.......Clinton left office with a surplus. That is old news now.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Aug 25, 2008 22:53:02 GMT -5
So there is no oil on the alloted land for oil? I suppose they already drilled? I don't think so, unless you can show some proof and if there is no oil, why don't they sell, make money and invest in other countries the way they do ours. This is the 21st Century, Mink. the oil companies have methods for finding promising pockets of oil without drilling holes. Cuts down drastically on the number of "dry holes." I posted this link once before, but here it is again: the Minerals Management Service has a map of the oil wells off the Santa Barbara coast. Look at the map. You will see that the oil wells are clustered in groups, not uniformly distributed, one in the center of each lease. What does that tell you? There isn't oil under every lease. Do you reach that same conclusion? They have similar maps available online for all of the existing offshore lease areas. Mink, without realizing it, you just made the argument for the "Drill Here. Drill Now" crowd. We are sending billions of dollars a day to countries that don't like us. Why are we doing that when we have vast resources within our own country? You can thank the Gingrich Congress, abetted by John Kasich on Ways and Means, for that surplus. I will grant you that the Republican Party lost that financial discipline under Hassert. The War on Terrorism didn't help. But, the Bush tax cuts, which even you benefitted from, have shown that the American economy still has the capacity for growth, if the government will just get out of the way. |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Aug 26, 2008 13:58:35 GMT -5
This morning's Wall Street Journal has this: So, we can stipulate that Speaker Pelosi opposes offshore drilling off of the coast of California. However, that does not justify her blocking of any effort to lift the federal ban on offshore drilling off of someone else's coast, does it? One point that this op-ed doesn't make is that the vast majority of us rely on gasoline (or diesel) for our transportation needs. To make a transition to natural gas for transportation is not trivial. It would require that everyone (except for Madame Speaker, of course) to buy a new car that runs on CNG. Honda has a Civic right now that runs on CNG, and it's only $25K. How many people (you included, Mink) are prepared to dump their old car and buy a new car? You know that, if there's a big shift away from gasoline and diesel, your old car will barely be worth scrap iron prices, so don't count on any trade-in value. So, once you have yourself this shiny new CNG Civic, you can thumb your nose at those smug Prius drivers. Until, of course, it comes time to fill it up. PG&E has not yet got its act together to allow home refilling stations. There's one available but it's not yet approved for California. So, you can take your car to the ONE station available, the PG&E yard on Occidental Road. The line won't be that bad. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Aug 26, 2008 15:05:35 GMT -5
"You can have a transition with natural gas. That, that is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels."
I think she was refering to the hot air coming out of her mouth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Aug 26, 2008 23:08:28 GMT -5
So, gaffney, even if they drill (which they haven't done on allocated land), "we" won't see any profits, if any for years on down the line, so what is the point? It is a gamble and a bad one to put the country through.
Although your selected article questions Pelosi's comprehension of what she is doing, why aren't you putting the same pressure on your own reps to see what they are doing, have done to ensure our needs? With the highest deficit in history, maybe you should question what they were thinking putting all the eggs in one basket.....the war to help others be democratic? We are in debt. Why would we expect the country to spend more?
|
|
