A must read...

Cancel 2016.2

Cancel 2016.2

The Almighty
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/12/08/oil-rich_america_112318.html

If you think we need jobs, if you believe our deficit spending is horrid, if you think we should reduce dependency on foreign oil... if you think any or all of the previous, then you should read this article and lobby your Rep and your Senators to push forward.

With expanded exploration and conservation, the United States could also eventually supply half its own petroleum needs. If we were to eliminate just 5 million barrels of our current daily 9 million barrels of imported petroleum, the annual savings could reach nearly $200 billion per year. Eventually, the new gas and oil could add another 1.6 million new jobs and add up to nearly $1 trillion in federal revenue.
Click to expand...

Obviously the money being kept in the US is a major incentive.

Current crises in American foreign policy -- Iran's efforts to obtain the bomb, the protection of an embattled Israel, stopping the funding of radical Islamists -- might be freed from the worries of perennial OPEC threats of cutoffs and price spikes.
Click to expand...

Something we have been bitching about since at least Carter's failed Presidency. Yet instead of acting to reduce dependency, we make it harder to produce our own.

Federal subsidies for inefficient corn-based ethanol production in the Midwest also could cease. That would save the Treasury billions of dollars and allow millions of American acres to return to food production to supply an increasingly hungry world.
Click to expand...

This is a personal pet peeve. Not only is it not worth it when it comes to fuel production, but it also drives up the costs of food. Currently about 20% of our crops go to ethanol production.

Yet if the United States does not produce much of the fuel that it uses, will the oil-exporting Gulf sheikdoms, Nigeria or Iran better protect the world's environment than American-based oil companies? Would our oil dollars or theirs be less likely to fuel terrorism, illegal arms sales and rogue regimes?
Click to expand...

A point I have made many times, yet no lefty can provide an answer to this...

Which leads to...

In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency and high unemployment. Development of America's vast new gas and oil finds addresses all three at once.
Click to expand...

This is a message that would resonate with frustrated voters. Given the inexcusable delay in the pipeline construction, we know Obama won't be campaigning on the above. Time for a Rep or Libertarian to bear the standard.
 
Nothing Victor Davis Hanson has ever written can possibly be characterized as a must read, unless, of course, you love right-wing hackery. It's like me posting that something Noam Chomsky has written is a must read.
 
Dungheap said:
Nothing Victor Davis Hanson has ever written can possibly be characterized as a must read, unless, of course, you love right-wing hackery. It's like me posting that something Noam Chomsky has written is a must read.
Click to expand...

Oh, Noam isn't a must a read. I use to love post his stuff, it makes people crazy.
 
Dungheap said:
Nothing Victor Davis Hanson has ever written can possibly be characterized as a must read, unless, of course, you love right-wing hackery. It's like me posting that something Noam Chomsky has written is a must read.
Click to expand...

Wow, imagine that... rather than comment on the content, our resident hack attacks the author. Thanks for once again displaying what a truly moronic partisan left wing nut you are.
 
Superfreak said:
Wow, imagine that... rather than comment on the content, our resident hack attacks the author. Thanks for once again displaying what a truly moronic partisan left wing nut you are.
Click to expand...

I would add to my previous post... the posts following Dungs are exactly what he wanted. See how it derails the thread from the topic?

It is a shame Dung is so beholden to his masters.
 
Superfreak said:
Wow, imagine that... rather than comment on the content, our resident hack attacks the author. Thanks for once again displaying what a truly moronic partisan left wing nut you are.
Click to expand...

Well authors have a great deal to do with content. I am like Dung, and there are just something's I won't waste my time reading.
 
Superfreak said:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/12/08/oil-rich_america_112318.html

If you think we need jobs, if you believe our deficit spending is horrid, if you think we should reduce dependency on foreign oil... if you think any or all of the previous, then you should read this article and lobby your Rep and your Senators to push forward.



Obviously the money being kept in the US is a major incentive.



Something we have been bitching about since at least Carter's failed Presidency. Yet instead of acting to reduce dependency, we make it harder to produce our own.



This is a personal pet peeve. Not only is it not worth it when it comes to fuel production, but it also drives up the costs of food. Currently about 20% of our crops go to ethanol production.



A point I have made many times, yet no lefty can provide an answer to this...

Which leads to...



This is a message that would resonate with frustrated voters. Given the inexcusable delay in the pipeline construction, we know Obama won't be campaigning on the above. Time for a Rep or Libertarian to bear the standard.
Click to expand...


Politicians are in the pockets of oil companies and oil men. You remove this factor, you have solved half the problem.
 
Rana said:
Well authors have a great deal to do with content. I am like Dung, and there are just something's I won't waste my time reading.
Click to expand...

Even those we disagree with most can have valid points. If we choose to ignore everything those we don't like have to say, then NOTHING will ever get resolved.

Dung says the same bullshit every time an article brings up a bunch of points that he cannot argue, that also go against his masters wishes.
 
Rana said:
Politicians are in the pockets of oil companies and oil men. You remove this factor, you have solved half the problem.
Click to expand...

Rana, EVERY sector has its lobbyists that bribe our politicians. But NOTHING about that changes the FACT that we are idiots for allowing other countries to produce our energy supply.

The money, the jobs, and the environmental controls ALL STAY HERE if we produce our own. So please, tell me how it is in our best interest to allow foreign countries to produce the oil and nat gas instead of us.
 
My biggest disappointment in the Obama Administration is the failure to call for a "Moon Launch" type effor to get fully energy independent.
 
Jarod said:
My biggest disappointment in the Obama Administration is the failure to call for a "Moon Launch" type effor to get fully energy independent.
Click to expand...

If done properly, it would have been the best thing he could have done for the economy. Building out the energy infrastructure across the board. Oil, Nat Gas, Alt Energy. Ignoring the first two while trying to focus solely on the third is absurd. There is NO way alt energy is going to make a substantial impact in energy in the next 10 years. We have to have all three.
 
Rana said:
Well authors have a great deal to do with content. I am like Dung, and there are just something's I won't waste my time reading.
Click to expand...

Tell us Rana:

1) Is it smart to use food for energy production when it is highly inefficient AND people are starving in other parts of the world?

2) Is it smart to complain about the environmental protections on oil production HERE, when the alternative is to let someone else produce our oil/nat gas with us having NO control over the environmental consequences of that production?

3) Is it smart to ship our money overseas to foreign producers of oil and nat gas when that money could stay IN the US and benefit our economy?

4) Is it smart to ship jobs overseas when we could be putting people HERE to work?
 
Superfreak said:
Even those we disagree with most can have valid points. If we choose to ignore everything those we don't like have to say, then NOTHING will ever get resolved.

Dung says the same bullshit every time an article brings up a bunch of points that he cannot argue, that also go against his masters wishes.
Click to expand...


The article is transparently stupid. If you want to read something about energy policy read something from someone who knows about energy policy and isn't a hack, right-wing or left-wing.
 
Dungheap said:
The article is transparently stupid. If you want to read something about energy policy read something from someone who knows about energy policy and isn't a hack, right-wing or left-wing.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... you are truly a fucking hack. So from now on everyone should just ignore anything and everything you write.
 
DH is a great poster. If I were putting together a liberal debate team, he'd be one of my first five picks. On my old board some of the guys posted who they would pick for their debate team, and who they would pick for cheerleaders. It turned out to be both funny and revealing.

Definitely DH would be one of my top picks though. Don't fret SF, I am certain you'd get picked for the conservative team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top