Better Late Than Never…Sort of.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:04am Leo Pusateri
President Bush, thanks for speaking out for sanity.
(CNSNews.com) - “The United States has an opportunity to help increase the supply of oil on the market,” thereby easing gasoline prices for hard-working Americans,” President Bush said on Monday.He reminded Congress that he has proposed opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Continental Shelf to domestic oil drilling — something that would “help us through this difficult period.”
You almost had, it, Mr. President. If you had pushed harder on what you proposed earlier in your presidency, we would be nearing the end of this mess in which we find ourselves, or at the very least we’d be seeing some light at the end of the tunnel. But after the usual suspects of enviro-whackos, along with their willing shills in Congress did their normal routine of wailing and gnashing of teeth, instead of holding your ground on the matter, you backed off. Rather than rallying the American people to the need for harvesting our own domestic energy reserves, you instead took a page from the Eisenhower playbook and played golf with regard to the issue. You even went so far as to play right into the envirowhackos hands, simultaneously increasing the credibility of their argument while weakening yours.
And you almost had it today, Mr. President. You almost had it on the nuts.
But then you went and said this:
“We remind our friends and allies overseas that we’re all too dependent on hydrocarbons, and we must work to advance tech that help us become less dependent on hydrocarbons,” Bush said on Monday as he headed out to Europe.
One step forward, three steps back.
Mr. President, now’s not the time to humor the delusional fancies of the crazy uncles in the attic making life a living hell for the rest of the family. You’re damned right we’re
“addicted” to oil; in much the same manner as we’re “addicted” to air and to food. So what? We’ve got plenty of it if our legislators would finally quit kowtowing to the crazy uncles in the enviro-whacko movement and act in the interests of the American people for a change.
Screw the enviro-whackos. When the hell were they ever right? About anything?
We have the technology to harvest our own resources in a way that minimally disrupts the surrounding environment; in many cases augmenting it.
Mr. President, you have a nation that’s bleeding from the ears economically, and you have it within the scope of your office to issue executive orders to stop that bleeding. May I add that, given that we’re in the midst of an economic emergency, and given that our nation’s economic security is at risk, it would not be a misuse of your power under executive authority to do so.
And what greater a presidential legacy to leave your fellow Americans, than to decrease their dependence on foreign oil?
Entry Filed under: General Government, Uncategorized
67 Comments
1. Bigfoot | June 9th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I like this fact from the Business and Media Institute link:
If this is any indication, drilling in ANWR will have an environmental consequence that is very different from what they naysayers predict - caribou overpopulation. So let’s drill, and as a fringe benefit, give the Inuit some more venison.
2. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Louisiana is the 2nd biggest fish supplier in the USA—thanks to the oil rigs in the Gulf.
The majority of the fishing surrounds these rigs–that is where the fish are. Florida, no rigs, no fish. Oil companies were to take down rigs after production ceased, but fishermen complained and that was reversed. No cases of spills off Louisiana from rigs, and the great majority come not from production sites, but from tanker transport.
3. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
What makes either of you think the oil brought up from anywhere in the US will cost less the the spot price on the NYMEX?
4. Leo Pusateri | June 9th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
The spot price on the NYMEX will decrease if there is more of a supply.
5. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
4. Leo Pusateri | June 9th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
So why not have non OPEC nations just increase their production and buy more oil from them?
6. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
So Pain, your solution is less oil to lower the price and increase supply? That sounds like the Obama liberal plan. Awesome.
7. Some Assembly Required | June 9th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Leo, lets assume your right and the increible supply of oil jumps from ANWAR. Your still forgetting oil is a non-renewable resource (Meaning theres only so much on the planet). That extra supply lasts for what, 2 to 3 years in 10 to 15 years when the projects are online. I don’t know what your smoking, but considering there is the ever demanding push for alternative energies in nations outside of the US it just doesn’t sound like a good investment to me. Either for the short or long term.
Now the ‘Chevrolet Volt’, that looks promising. As do ‘Tesla Motors’.
8. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
6. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Where did We say less oil?
We suggest the US “encourage” its “allies” in the non OPEC world to increase their production. This would be the same policy as Bush followed in Iraq. Let other nations shoulder the potential environmental risk as Iraq shouldered the burden of al Qaeda after the US invasion.
America buys most of its oil from non OPEC sources anyway why not offer them some incentives to “do America a solid?”
9. Carlton Pryor, Lead Economist, TED-OG | June 9th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
What no one wants to accept is that the age of 300 million Americans having the highest standard of living on the planet is coming to an end this century. Now fortunately if you are over say 40 years of age today you will not see it but the SUV lifestyle to which the average American has become accustomed will be long gone 50 years from today. By 2058 Europe and worse the Saudi/Emirates/Qatari money will be backing the growth of the Chinese and Indian Middle Class which by then will be 1 billion strong and better educated than the entire US population.
To a trained eye it really doesn’t matter who you elect President for the next eight years but it will matter who has their hand on the domestic economic policy tiller from 2016-2036 when someone has to do something not only about energy but about Social Security.
Going Green is just another bubble that will burst in 2015 like housing is doing now. Drilling in ANWR is a knee jerk response to people who are acting like children about SUVs and will act even more like children when a responsible Congress pushes the Social Security retirement age to 82 where the hell it belongs.
People can work longer to pay for 7 dollar a gallon petrol at that point. Social Security was meant to ease you into death after retiring mates not be “mad money” for Boomers.
10. hermie | June 9th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
We could put $500 billion into an alternative fuels project but we still would not see any effect on oil prices today, or the next 10 years.
There is no way that we can convert every car, truck, train, ship, factory, etc in the US to alternatives within a reasonable cost to the populace. You just can’t dictate “You will switch to XXX by tomorrow.” It’s like Congress dictating new CAFÉ standards to demand that cars get 60 MPG, without acknowledging that the technology to do it is either non-existent, or extremely costly. You still will have to supply the existing demand and the future demands taking into account the eventual conversion to new technologies.
I drive a Honda Element that gets 25-30 mpg. I will still have to drive that Honda for the next few years because I cannot afford get rid of it and buy a new car, even if the mpg for the new one is 100 mpg. The same goes not just for individuals, but for trucking fleets, cab companies, and others who own vehicles.
We still have to increase supply in order to bring prices down. That is a concept that the Dems have ignored the last two years when they claimed that they would bring gas prices down from what they claimed was too high.
11. HeyHey | June 9th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
The President’s February 28th display of ignorance…..
Q What’s your advice to the average American who is hurting now, facing the prospect of $4 a gallon gasoline, a lot of people facing —
THE PRESIDENT: Wait, what did you just say? You’re predicting $4 a gallon gasoline?
Q A number of analysts are predicting —
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yeah?
Q — $4 a gallon gasoline this spring when they reformulate.
THE PRESIDENT: That’s interesting. I hadn’t heard that.
Alot of people heard and predicted it…but I guess he was out of the loop.
12. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
11. HeyHey | June 9th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
ouch!
13. MMoser | June 9th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
“The spot price on the NYMEX will decrease if there is more of a supply.”
Not necessarily. Today?s price point for oil has little to do with an imbalance between supply and demand. I don’t see long lines at the gas pumps like we experienced in the 70?s. OPEC sees no reason to increase production as they can supply demand at current production levels.
Speculation is driving up the price of crude and inescapably all other petroleum products. Fund managers putting their clients 401Ks? into oil futures across the globe are responsible for driving oil product prices through the roof and this trend will until…?
My guess is that the movers and shakers, who invested early in alternative energy sources, started this trend by heavily investing in oil futures. Petroleum has had little or no serious competition from emerging alternative energy markets. Those big investors in alternative energy entered the game too soon. Far sooner that these new technologies were able to provide the efficiencies required to compete with oil anyway.
If this be true, the only hope for those whom had bet big on alternative energy was to decrease the efficiency of petroleum by driving prices higher. These investors must giggle, while Congress holds energy inquisitions grilling oil company execs simultaneously spending vast sums of taxpayers? monies subsidizing the development of alternative energy as fuel prices continue to soar.
14. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Then Pain, we have encouraged our allies to increase production to no avail. Yet you libs moan about us producing less, moan about us producing more, and vote 90% plus to not produce more, no nuclear energy, no coal energy.
Brilliant. Moan and groan, vote no to any new drilling, no coal or nuclear energy, no new refineries, and blame Bush. Brilliant.
15. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
13. MMoser | June 9th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Chief among these high rollers in greentech is one T Boone Pickens of BP Capital who predicted oil spikes very similar to the one that happened Friday on CNBC not very long ago . . .
16. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
14. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Well the GOP had Congress for six years why did they not pass ANWR drilling when Bush had the House and the Senate run by Red State Raiders?
17. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Pain - because your side stymied it. Look it up.
No new oil.
No new nuclear.
no new hydro.
No new wind. (thanks to Teddy K.)
Solar is still not viable.
Just what IS the proposed Democrat plan?
FYI, our oil demand has remained steady even as we have expanded due to efficiency gains.
So - since you’ve stymied almost all the alternative… what is your plan? Enough with the attacks.
WHAT IS YOU PLAN?
FYI, I asked the same thing when you killed Social Security reform. It turned out that besides stopping the Republicans, you didn’t actually have a plan. Great.
18. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
“Well the GOP had Congress for six years why did they not pass ANWR drilling when Bush had the House and the Senate run by Red State Raiders?” Pain
Softball anyone? Republicans voted 92% to do so, Dems voted 90% not to.
19. Danish Artist | June 9th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Since Obama has claimed that he will stay away from special interests, does that include the obstructionist environmentalists that have paved the way for this oil debacle?
Oh, to the left the only special interests are
Big Oil
Big Tobacco
Big Health Care
Big Defense
And every left wing special interest group are “concerned citizens”.
20. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
18. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
In 2002 during the 107th Congress the Senate was a single 60 vote motion on cloture away from passing the drilling in ANWR. The vote hinged on several Democrats siding with republicans to have the vote. Senators Breaux and Landrieu of Louisiana and Akaka and Inouye of Hawaii sided with the GOP Senators as did Miller of Georgia.
Curiously, in such an important issue when passage would have seemed certain with a few Democrats leaning toward the GOP side several members of the GOP voted “nay” to cloture killing any chance of ANWR drilling being passed.
Those GOP Senators were Chafee-RI, DeWine OH, Fitzgerald IL, Smith NH, Smith OR, Snowe ME Collins ME and Senator John McCain of Arizona.
Taking into account the highest estimate of reserves under ANWR ~16 MMM bbl consumed at the current rate of 21 MM bbl/day the reserve would last only 2.08 Terran years. And had the measure passed in 2002 the US would still be four years away from receiving any benefit in reduced dependence on OPEC or other foreign sources of oil.
Of course the US needs the rest of the word to price oil in USD. The move away from the USD to the EURO or the SWISS FRANC would be catastrophic for the US economy. Therefore the vast majority of large banks and other concerns do not wish the US to be energy independent in respect to oil, coal maybe, but not oil.
The environmental factors are something that many of these concerns, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and until recently Bear Stearns could hang their hats to not expose publicly their need to leverage the profit from oil being priced only in USD. The run of the mill American consumer cannot see the evil We note that said companies profit from agony at the well head and at the petrol pump. Of course conservative supporters who would rather be right than have to pay fair value for petrol will say this is a dodge and We have no plan.
Here is the plan. Buy oil from Iraq directly by creating a cartel outside of OPEC and inviting them to join. Price your non OPEC oil at a $70 per barrel and give the multinational oil companies the stiff arms by going with mid cap companies like Anadarko and dump a months worth of Iraq money into their lap so they can work with Brazil BEFORE they go OPEC. Once Brazil is a mamber of OPEC it is all over and the US will never be able to maintain the SUV lifestyle beyond 2012.
If you go the competitive cartel route [and no this is not nationalization] you can at least squeeze the price of oil down to 80 bucks a barrel without increasing production. The extra ten bucks is vigorish for the real speculators pension funds and hedge fund managers that are buying the oil markets out of CONTANGO with long futures.
With the money you save somebody has to either come up with a marketing campaign that makes riding the bus or biking to work seem cool or do some serious science on looking for the “shipstone.”
21. congressive | June 9th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Conservative plan = useless
Progressive plan = use less
Why is “conservation” such a dirty word for conservatives?
22. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
21. congressive | June 9th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
We often wonder this.
They want to have the cake and eat it too which creates a paradox for both the cake and the eater.
You cannot “go green” and want to live in the exurbs while working 60 miles away driving your 7 passenger SUV to the office and your spouse driving a car or equal or larger size to job/errands et cetera.
The American Middle Clas lifestyle is a lifestyle of excesses that will be sacrificed one way or another, soon.
23. congressive | June 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Ya know, Saddam was arguably responsible for cheap oil during the nineties. Every time OPEC would try to cut production to raise prices, Saddam would crank open his wells and fill the void with cheap oil. OPEC’s plans fell apart again and again as a result. Anyone who tracked oil futures back then knew this.
Take out Saddam, eliminate market competition, prices skyrocket. You didn’t expect Bush to drive DOWN oil prices, did you?
McCain’s family fortune is in BEER, so if he’s elected, expect the five-buck Bud to be not far behind :-)
24. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Pain - every vote counts. Not just the swing ones.
Yes, as pointed out SOME Republicans voted against it. They joined the vast majority of Democrats.
Meanwhile… WHAT IS YOUR PLAN???????
Planning on opening up ANWAR now? Bull.
Planning on new nukes? Bull.
Planning on removing the wind restrictions? Bull.
Planning on another hydroelectric plant somewhere? Bull.
As stated, we HAVE been increasing efficiency and we get that. Its hard to legislate that though, isn’t it? Kind of up to the engineers and scientists. Does about as much good as legislating a cure for cancer. Sound good - but cancer can’t read the laws. Neither can internal combustion engines.
So yes. A couple of RINO’s helped you stifle ANWAR. Big deal.
You’re not even claiming you’d change that. So what’s your point? You don’t have a plan you can articulate. So excuse me if I think you’re a partisan hack.
By the way. I think you’re a partisan hack.
Now post some other useless trivia. Hack.
Oh, and I wonder what Obama has the4 thermostat set to in his $1.5 million home?
25. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
congressive. Is that what Sadaam did during the nineties? Hmmm. Good trick while under UN restrictions. Remember food for oil? What decade was that in? I can’t remember either.
But I though that Iraq was a “war for oil”? I distinctly remember hearing liberals chant “No blood for oil!” So, is that chant over with now? How do you guys get your messages on when to start and when to stop these lunatic chants?
But, well what do YOU think the Democrat plan is?
Don’t worry. I don’t really expect an answer. I remember the Social Security debate.
But I’m sure that just pulling out of Iraq and the resulting war will not affect anything at all. At least, I HOPE not.
26. HeyHey | June 9th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
“Oh, and I wonder what Obama has the4 thermostat set to in his $1.5 million home?”
and McCain in his 8 homes….
27. Magnum Serpentine | June 9th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Big oil needs to drill in the plots of land it already has permission to drill in. They are not drilling because they do not want to lower gas prices.
Time to file Price Gouging charges against Big Oil.
28. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
23. congressive | June 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Cindy McCain [who owns well over one million shares of Anheuser Busch] stands to make 200 million dollars + if AB is purchased by Belgian brewer InBev. It goes to show that even the “most precious” of American icons are for sale.
I’m amazed the new Freedom Tower [now that is a bit of Orwell] isn’t sponsored by Credit Suisse or BNP Paribas. maybe the naming rights just haven’t been sold yet I would expect that pot of gold to be tipped maybe a year after the tenth anniversary.
29. William Teach | June 9th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Got proof, Magnum?
I’m still waiting for Nancy P and the Donkey’s to put forth their promised plan to lower energy prices. Like, Robin, they are still deflecting.
30. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
24. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
We think you are a meat popsicle but that does not change the state of the costs of energy on Terra one whit. When you go to the petrol pump you are paying more in real dollars because you are only getting a few benefits of the taxes because you are not addicted to petrol you are addicted to cheap petrol and now your life is changing to match the stress on lifestyle as it is in Europe, Africa and Asia that you thoguth you would never live to see. Fooled you did it not?
The truth is there is no cheap fuel keep your lifestyle as it is now or more lavishly plan that you want. That is over. You can live less extravagantly or pay more money to live beyond your means. Those are the options other than pushing the inevitable away for two decades by competing with OPEC.
Nuclear power has nothing to do with the SUV McMansion lifestyle you people want the US government could have solarized most of your homes with what they’ve spent on “Homeland Security” and the “War on Terror” a three trillion dollar toilet flush for the murder of 1/100 000th of the population. Now think about that rationally nearly 7 terran years out from the event Kahn. Your government has blown 3 trillion dollars on window dressing to make people think they are “safe” from “terrorism.”
You want a plan? get an initiaitve passed in your community to allow you to raise chickens in the city limits. grow your own food. drive less work from home stop buying crap you don’t need. Because there is no plan that allows you to keep doing that. You want to be Mickey Mantle to get the new liver so you can keep drinking. Now that is stuck on stupid.
31. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
27. Magnum Serpentine | June 9th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
They [Big Oil] really don’t have an incentive to drill anywhere else do they? There’s hundreds of thousands of acres approved where they could be drilling and they just don’t because that would increase supply even if it only knocked a few bucks off the Dec 2016 contract.
32. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
The libs here remind me of a dog chasing his tail non stop expecting us to be impressed by this cogent and intellectual activity. Oh the insanity about their superior plan of no ANWR or coastal drilling, no nuclear power, no wind power within their view, no coal power, no new refineries, then proclaim Bush has gotten us into this mess and Bush has no plan.
Chase away, your “arguments” are inane.
33. Pain | June 9th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
24. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
hack?
hardly.
Your side just gets angry when confronted with the irrefutable Truth. You side likes gut feelings and fuzzy logic that allows you to change your positions when it become politically expedient. Flip flops. Well it is summer in your hemisphere of Terra.
You are the one paying four dollars a gallon for petrol not Us and eating second for fruits and vegetable because the firsts and the selects are too expensive.
We posted Our plan before but you ignored it you were too mad that We pointed out to you that the GOP nominee for President voted against ANWR drilling.
Here is what we suggest
Buy oil from Iraq [actually Kurdistan as a breakaway from Iraq would be better] directly by creating a cartel outside of OPEC and inviting them to join. Price your non OPEC oil at a $70 per barrel and give the multinational oil companies the stiff arms by going with mid cap companies like Anadarko and dump a months worth of Iraq money into their lap so they can work with Brazil BEFORE they go OPEC. Once Brazil is a mamber of OPEC it is all over and the US will never be able to maintain the SUV lifestyle beyond 2012.
If you go the competitive cartel route [and no this is not nationalization] you can at least squeeze the price of oil down to 80 bucks a barrel without increasing production. The extra ten bucks is vigorish for the real speculators pension funds and hedge fund managers that are buying the oil markets out of CONTANGO with long futures.
34. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
All liberals here are probably to young to remember the oil embargos of the 70’s. It was at that time that we should have aggressively begun a sustainable energy policy, including alternative energies and domestic drilling. So EACH PARTY is too blame for our current crisis and unless, and until we hold all of their feet to the fire. We’ll just continue to have problems.
For all of you liberals who bow at the government alter and believe they will resolve of your problems, I submit the following:
Senate Votes To Privatize Its Failing Restaurants
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/08/AR2008060801765.html?hpid=topnews
Now, if they can’t run restaurants, how do you think they’ll do with healthcare?
35. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
32. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I’m proud of you SEW you are a true GOPer!
When confronted with the possibility of planes being used to attack to US the GOPer Prez said “I don’t wanna hear it!”
When General Shinseki said the US needed 450 K troops in Iraq Bush said , “I don’t wanna hear it!”
When poor residents of N.O. couldn’t get out and even the Coast Guard was saying soemone needed to kick FEMA in the butt, Bush said “I don’t wanna hear it!”
And now you when offered alternatives to ANWR which would only be a drop in the bucket anyway even if it did have 16 MMM barrels of oil a reserve of 1/5th the annual consumption globally of 85 MMM per annum you just go all partisan and sya “I don’t wanna hear it.” I’m not paying 4 bucks+ a gallon for gas and I won’t be payin the 5 bucks you will have to pay in the months to come. But you deserve this knot in your stomach SEW because this is where your loyalty to the GOP has gotten you. So tell me what are you gonna sacrifice food or shelter so you can drive all you want?
36. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
“Once Brazil is a mamber of OPEC it is all over and the US will never be able to maintain the SUV lifestyle beyond 2012.” - Pain
This pretty much sums up the liberal mindset, which unfortunately includes McCain, on this issue. There enough domestic reserves to keep us going for a long, long time. Plenty of time for us to develop newer energies.
But nobody wants to talk about that. People would rather just play the blame game.
Pathetic.
37. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
“When poor residents of N.O. couldn’t get out and even the Coast Guard was saying soemone needed to kick FEMA in the butt, Bush said “I don’t wanna hear it!” - Robin
I thought the following might be pertinent to that comment.
Ray Nagin: School Buses Not Good Enough
New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin garnered a ton of publicity with a profanity-laced interview he gave to WWL radio last Thursday, where he blasted President Bush and Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco for not coming to rescue his city in time.
However, Nagin’s most newsworthy comments - where he explained why he didn’t use hundreds of city school buses to evacuate his city’s flood victims - went almost unnoticed.
Turns out, Nagin turned his nose up at the yellow buses, demanding more comfortable Greyhound coaches instead.
“I need 500 buses, man,” he told WWL. “One of the briefings we had they were talking about getting, you know, public school bus drivers to come down here and bus people out of here.”
Nagin described his response:
“I’m like - you’ve got to be kidding me. This is a natural disaster. Get every doggone Greyhound bus line in the country and get their asses moving to New Orleans.”
While Nagin was waiting for his Greyhound fleet, Katrina’s floodwaters swamped his school buses, rendering them unusable.
38. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
37. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Maybe because their in ground fuel supply was contaminated?? With rain water?
Didn’t get that nugget from the MSM or the Freepers or did’ya??
Not even CNN would say what the US Army Corps of Engineers knew. The refueling islands for the school buses were already under water and none of them were standing full in the middle of the week after the summer school season had ended according to the New Orleans School Board Dept of Transportation.
Who loads fuel into buses when a mandatory evacuation has already been called and the storm is over? Nobody because nobody saw irt coming except for the Army Corps who told FEMA and Mike Brown . . . well we know what Mike Brown did.
Now James Lee Witt who grew up a poor boy in Arkansas would have known that those poor folk wouldn’t leave their homes because the first of the month hadn’t come and they couldn’t. Buses, Nagin, Blanco all of it was a disaster compounded by politics. if James Lee Witt had been the FEMA head this would not have gone down this way. Mike Brown just didn’t know what to do and George Bush put him there. Even if the mayor of New orleans was a brain stem on legs it was the FEMA director’s job to push his hindparts out of the way and get the job done. Period.
39. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
I am not excusing Brown or the feds. They all dropped the ball.
But, the ball started with Nagin. And he failed miserably. That is undeniable.
But your partisan attempt to excuse his lame efforts is duly noted.
40. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Pain wrote “You are the one paying four dollars a gallon for petrol not Us and eating second for fruits and vegetable because the firsts and the selects are too expensive.” clearly demonstrating that he or she is a foreigner commenting on US politics as if they were an American Democrat.
But Pain… how many Euros per litre are YOU paying for Petrol?
And FYI - I’m doing fine, thank you.
But YOUR plan is to buy from “Khurdisatan” and set the price at $70????? Well great. Hey, why don’t I just go to a gas station here and set the price at $1.50? You twit. Correction, hack.
The price of oil is global. Better look at the riots and protests in France and G.B.. The anger in India. The fact that Indonesia now says they are stopping exports to support their own needs.
Your solution is a delusion. Thanks. Great. Much help.
41. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Robin. Hey, great deflection. What is the Democrat solution to high gas prices??????
It’s not Iraq and it’s not New Orleans….
42. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
“But you deserve this knot in your stomach SEW because this is where your loyalty to the GOP has gotten you. So tell me what are you gonna sacrifice food or shelter so you can drive all you want?” Robin
Like I stated, Moan and Bitch that it’s Bush’s fault. Moan and Bitch, Robin. And your answer is it’s the GOPers fault. No drilling in ANWR, no coal energy, no nuclear energy, no wind energy in view of Dem royalty and no new refineries.
Robin a dog chasing his tail is intelligent next to you. No answers, no solutions, bitch and moan Robin, and blame Bush, but 92% of those GOPers voted for drilling ANWR and coastal areas, 90% of you intellectuals voted against, and look who’s bitching and moaning!
43. Harry | June 9th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
You know Pusateri, all you have to do is ask Noonan what to do.
Ask Disanlibane.
We told them a LONG TIME AGO this was going to happen.
Over and over you trumpeted how GREAT the economy is doing and nothing was wrong, how could it under the Bush administration?
So now, NOW…you’re writing letters to the Preznit asking him to do something?
Everything we said has come true.
EVERYTHING.
Everything you said is, and was, obviously wrong.
Sorry A-hole, the horse is out of the corral now.
Whine somewhere else buffoon.
Where is Bush’s energy plan?
NOWHERE.
Lemmings. Unbelievable.
44. Harry | June 9th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Solution?
Four words pinhead…
Get Out Of Iraq.
The boy kings misadventure caused an economic unbalance world wide.
His sabre rattling has left the world with middle east jitters.
Now the buffoon threatens Iran.
Sorry Jackass,
it is Iraq.
45. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
42. SEW | June 9th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
No permanent theocratic GOP majority
41. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Hey how about a rebate in the form of a stimulus payment for one third the cost of your gasoline purchses advanced against this year’s tax return? A single sheet rebate form car make average miles driven a week and let the IRS do the rest. The money could go out as early as oh I dunno August 31?
It could add up to $ 1000 per vehicle. Change you can believe in!
46. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
So, where would that money come from Robin? Just print it? Oh, tax the rich - thats right.
How is that different than McCains cut gas taxes proposal? Oh, well it is much more - isn’t it?
And Harry - get out of Iraq? You don’t think the rsulting power vacuum and regional war will have a negative affect? Wow - were are you writing from? Roseyscenarioland?
47. neocon | June 9th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Harry,
This a much more deeply rooted problem than Iraq. It bore the first ugly tentacles in the 70’s and for the last nearly three decades, OPEC and the ME have had us by the short hairs, over the barrel of oil. Had we addressed it then, this wouldn’t even be an issue. Terrorism, or the war, is not the issue, it’s the topic. Our dependence on their oil because of our failure to act domestically is the issue.
Both parties, in concert with oil companies, have sold us all down the river for decades. The ironic thing is that had oil companies started a slow transition in the 70’s, they would have incurred much less costs than they will by having to quickly react now. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if tax payers once again bore the brunt of that.
Bush, Pelosi and Reid all seem like deer caught in the headlights on this one which is all the more reason to demand that this country be run like a business. We need successful, private sector experienced people to run this country.
The big government paradigm has proven to be a failure every time.
48. Robin Naismith Green | June 9th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
46. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
First, I am neither your wife nor your daughter so don’t put words in my mouth.
Where does your income tax return money come from? You think there’s a tax pool? And as far as I am concerned I think corporate taxes should be lowered and the estate tax should be repealed. If everyone paid 20% WITH NO LOOPHOLES the tax issue in the US would be solved. Period.
Where does the money to supplement the War in iraq come from? That’s where the Obama Stimulus money would come from the same damned place Bush got his 170 MMM; from the US Treasury. And you don’t have to print electronic currency and how gast has M1 been expanding, electronically for the last 3 decades and the US hasn’t turned into Hungary in an inflationary currency sense. I don’t have to insult you for the rest of the world to see how stupid you are. All you have to do is keep typing.
49. Viral Nexus | June 9th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
46. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
I would assume it would come from the same place this last stimulus payment came from. I wish all of you people would stop your squabling and just say that GOVERNMENT CAN NOT FIX THIS PROBLEM!!! The only people that will fix it are consumers and businesses that respond to consumer demand. The GM Volt is a sham just as it was when they (GM) came out with the EV1- it a publicity stunt. However there are increasing efforts by Tesla Motors, AC Propulsions and most recently Nissan to introduce extended range zero emission vehicles in the next 4 years. In addition anyone with some effort and/or help can convert their existing vehicles to electric for as little as $6-$10k. Obviously that isn’t feasible for all Americans but offering tax breaks, incentives, and subsidies to consumers and businesses to purchase and develope similar alternatives could help. There is a lot that people can do for free if they would just take the initiative to do so. Drive less, car pool, get jobs closer to home, commute with smaller vehicles, get rid of the Hummers, Escalades, Suburbans, Tahoes, etc. If you increase supply then the prices will come back down and demand will go back up. When the price of oil dramatically fell in the 1990’s consumption shot through the roof and we started driving increasingly fuel thirsty vehicles and spreading our cities out in the form of suburbs. And now we have our current situation as a result. If you decrease demand then the price of oil WILL drop unless this really is a game of corporate greediness. And there are signs of a decreasing demand. I think I read a report that said there was a million barrel decrease in demand last quarter or month or something. The big auto manufactures have had to cut their big vehicle assembly lines because they are not selling. People are having a hard time unloading their SUVs because no one will buy them. In closing, I think this rush to a government solution is premature. The market will correct itself given time. The consumer will only take so much of a beating before they change their habbits. God knows I have.
One other thing on fuel efficiencies. The ICE has become 30% more efficient than where it started but this efficiency has equated to carrying heavier loads. If the auto industry would stop using as much steel as they do and instead use carbon fiber, bonded aluminum, and other composite materials we would see at the minimum a 100% increase in fuel efficiency. The auto industry has come screaching to a near slugs pace and this would be a good time for it to retool its production assemblies. I hope to God this will happen but I won’t hold my breath. Good luck.
50. Greg-O | June 9th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Those of us who live in Louisiana know what happened with Katrina. That’s why we made it clear to Gov. Kathleen Blanco that she should start looking for another job.
Back to the subject, there is no excuse for why we aren’t drilling ANWR and our continental shelf. China is drilling 50 miles off Key West, and probably didn’t ask permission from Nancy Pelosi. China also doesn’t have a Greenpeace/Sierra Club group mucking up progress.
51. Viral Nexus | June 9th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Neocon, I have never heard you talk so rationally in all of the time I have been here at BFB/BFV. I never thought I would agree with you but I do so wholeheartedly and 100%. I’m not sure if I we need big business to replace big government to run this country but I agree that our solution lies with entrapaneurs, businesses and the American consumer to fix this mess. The more involved the government gets the bigger the mess will be.
52. SteaM | June 9th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
49. Viral Nexus | June 9th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
“The only people that will fix it are consumers and businesses that respond to consumer demand.”
I agree with this and also what has already been mentioned, that the market will correct itself.
It seems possible that an adjustment in the market is on the horizon that seeks to respond to this increasing consumer demand for fossil fuel alternatives and energy efficiency.
I belive that both sides of the political sprectrum (and all of those in between), at this point, have an interest in seeking out these things. Maybe all for different reasons but still there’s the same interest.
53. Jeremiah | June 9th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
tardgressive at 3:40 PM
Progressive plan = use less
Meaning? Meaning we use less of what God has given us to use, provided we use our brains and do so, but instead, tard-gressives like congressive start to be a pain in the A** and try to make scare tactic threats to stop our REAL progress in the world. THus, congresstard keeps us future dependent on rich, VERY rich oil people in the Mid E.
It’s time to show people like congresstard at 3:40 PM we mean business and curb their threats to the side and in the wate barrel where they belong!
54. Kahn | June 9th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Robin, well - you’ve taken a college economics class. Great.
Read the above posts from conservative and liberal alike. The government is not the answer.
But in many many respects -the government IS the problem. And frankly, most of the below items are the result of caving to groups under the “liberal” umbrella.
No nukes (NIMBY’s and environmentalists)
Restrictions on wind (Ted Kennedy as a NIMBY)
No hydro (NIMBY’s and environmentalists)
No drilling (NIMBY’s and environmentalists)
No refineries (NIMBY’s and environmentalists)
No higher mileage requirements (big business AND auto unions)
No multi-fuel cars (Who is fighting these?)
No sugar based fuel imports from Brazil (Who is fighting this - farmers groups?)
Defense, including all the services and the intelligence agencies makes up 19% of the budget. 70% is made up by entitlement programs (Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, Social Security, veterans). There is also education, housing, and the rest. We live in a dangerous world. Do you really think that we can drain enough from the 19% to pay for the 60% increases in spending Obama is proposing?
You apparently took economics. Did you take algebra?
55. Mark | June 10th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Buy oil from Iraq [actually Kurdistan as a breakaway from Iraq would be better] directly by creating a cartel outside of OPEC and inviting them to join. Price your non OPEC oil at a $70 per barrel and give the multinational oil companies the stiff arms by going with mid cap companies like Anadarko and dump a months worth of Iraq money into their lap so they can work with Brazil BEFORE they go OPEC.
Great plan! I just have a couple of questions.
First, how do you get Iraq or Kurdistan and Brazil, as sovereign nations, to agree to sell there natural resources for half the going rate on world market? Seems like a hard sell to me unless you have some enticement, you’ve failed to mention and I can’t imagine, in mind. Seeing as the left has so loudly proclaimed “no war for oil” this might be a small wrinkle in your plan.
Second, why would Iraq allow you to dump their money into mid cap oil companies laps to solve our problems, especially considering our problems are worth billion to them, to keep Brazil out of OPEC? Please explain how the Iraqi interests are served by this.
Finally, how would mid cap oil companies -mid cap meaning they’re traded on the exchange- prevent investors, oh I don’t know… say, multinational oil companies currently holding billions in windfall profits or other investors, from stepping in and buying enough of their stocks to take a controlling interest in their companies, hence, gaining control of their oil contracts?
The only way I see to do this is at the point of a gun. Then, free market practices must be thrown out the window and a global socialistic price control system put in place. Oh! I know, the UN can run the program! After all, they’ve been so successful in the past running Iraqi oil programs.
56. Pain | June 10th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
55. Mark | June 10th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
How did you get nations to go along with invading Iraq? Rinse repeat. Trade concessions debt relief, US AID infrastructure investment there are many tools.
We do realpolitik the war is done now and America is Haiti if cut off from oil. Do the math 21 million bbl per day at 85 USD per or potentially 150 USD per. That is a 1.3 MMM USD difference per day.
The mid cap answer is that you grant recognition to Kurdistan. Sure the Turks will have a fit but what do they have that you want. It would be silly to argue “turkey is an ally” when you were willing to go to war in Iraq to get maybe a handful of al Qqaeda that would have not been there is Saddam had full control of his nation.
Subsidize Anadarko and others allowing them to go private. If the US Treasury can hike its skirts for Bear Stearns to the tune of 33MMM USD they can certainly loan the capital for a buy of 470 MM shares of Anadarko at a premium of 25 USD a share [or 103 USD.] For 1.3 times of the Bear Stearns bailout cost you get oil at a subsidy price [<85 USD bbl]t hat even the Chinese would drool at and you get bases in Kurdistan and Shi’ite Iraq flooding the economies of both with dollars thereby strengthening the US currency in the process.
How much oil can the Iraqis produce in a day? Enough to keep you greasy and give OPEC the stiff arm. We call it the Goldwater Plan because it is bassed on what he saw as a right thinking policy for energy in the 1970s. A real plan base from a real conservative.
57. Rightlane | June 10th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
How long, considering the current US debt load and the flagging US economy, do you think the US can afford to subsidize oil imports to tune of $70 USD a barrel? Dude, do you have any idea how much money you’re talking about? Let’s see, 20.8 million barrels per day times 365 day in a year at the subsidized amount of $70 a barrel equals… way too much money.
China and India are already subsidizing oil in their countries and they’ll continue to buy OPEC oil. OPEC nations are rolling in cash right now and they don’t have to sell the same volume of oil at $140 USD per barrel as they did at $35 USD per barrel. They can afford to wait us out and they will. We’ll be broke before they are unless we begin to produce oil domestically.
Basically, you’re suggesting that we spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year to keep our own oil in the ground. No thanks. I think we can come up with a better idea than that.
58. Kahn | June 11th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Thanks Pain. Well I’ve got winning the lottery and curing cancer on my calendar for today. I’ll get the non-existant nation of Khurdistan to sell me oil at half price tomorrow. Thanks for that valuable and insightful input.
59. Pain | June 11th, 2008 at 11:01 am
58. Kahn | June 11th, 2008 at 10:44 am
This still is a more cost effective plan that fighting future wars against Iran and Venezuela.
The cost per year would be 379 MMM USD one quarter of what the “War on terror” has cost the United Sates so far. What are the other options? We have heard nothing of the conservative plans to reduce the cost of petrol at the pump in the short term. Our plan could be up and running in 18 months what everyone from the political right has suggested will take at least three times than long and for some ideas 10 years. There will be one day We assure you that you will want to have left that oil in the ground under ANWR. That plot unlike the month’s worth of crude in the “SPR” is your real STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE!
60. JustAnotherTaxpayer | June 11th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Kahn,
What about the fictional gratitude of the fictional state of Iraq?
You wacky religious liberals, and your obsession with the Iraqi welfare program. Isn’t half a trillion dollars and 4000 lives enough to expect some help from the people whose burden we are currently bearing?
61. Above Ground Pool Fences&hellip | July 15th, 2008 at 4:57 am
Above Ground Pool Fences
More posts please ^_^
62. Blog Celebrity Baby Blog &hellip | July 24th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Blog Celebrity Baby Blog Photo Blog
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
63. merrill lynch retirement &hellip | August 7th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
merrill lynch retirement planning
Some weblog software programs, such as Wordpress, Movable Type and Community Server, support automatic pingbacks where all the links
64. AdSense Money Maker&hellip | August 18th, 2008 at 11:54 am
AdSense Money Maker
Do you know how to make money from AdSense automatically? You don’t!? I’ll teach you how!
65. Jim Crow Laws Family Law &hellip | September 18th, 2008 at 2:12 am
Jim Crow Laws Family Law Law School Rankings
I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me
66. bp education grant&hellip | September 30th, 2008 at 5:52 am
bp education grant
I can’t believe that I missed your point, I will have to do some research on this.
67. lap siding&hellip | October 6th, 2008 at 2:34 am
lap siding
The TrackBack specification was created by Six Apart, who first implemented it in their Movable Type blogging software in August