Republicans concede: Lifting Moratorium = Pointless

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


The title of this thread is completely misleading. In fact, it's an outright lie. It really speaks to the partisanship in this country and the willingness of many to use whatever means they can to achieve their agenda or support their arguments.

Not a single person, Republican or otherwise, who is in favor of lifting the moratorium on off-shore drilling, has called the move "pointless". Your confusion over this issue comes from your unwillingness to accurately examine both sides, as well as your inability to understand the cause of rising oil prices.

Everyone knows that lifting this ban will not produce a single barrel of oil today. That is not shocking news or some incredible revelation made by the President. The point of allowing off-shore drilling, aside from securing domestic oil for the United States in the future, is that such a move would send a message to oil futures speculators, as well as OPEC nations. This "psychological" effect, as you so ignorantly highlighted, would result in an IMMEDIATE drop in oil prices. The world needs to know that we are not willing to sit idly by and allow our economy to be damaged indefinitely at the hands of foreign nations who are basically blackmailing us. We will do whatever is reasonable to secure our own oil and gain energy independence, where possible. Regardless of how many years it takes to start pumping oil, we are only adding more and more time by doing absolutely nothing.

That's not to say that we shouldn't also explore alternative energy as well as conservation. However, even miracle-like developments in those fields will not instantly erase this nation's dependence on oil. We are an oil-driven economy. We cannot just get rid of the hundreds of millions of vehicles, aircraft, boats, etc., that require fossil fuel and replace them tomorrow with whatever miracle engine comes along (assuming one can even be produced anytime soon). We need to be rational here, folks. And we need to understand that those who oppose drilling of any kind are simply using the politics of fear with their baseless environmental claims. They ignore the fact that we risk more oil spills by shipping the stuff in from other countries than we risk drilling for it here ourselves. They ignore the fact that vastly more oil is spilled into the oceans naturally by the earth itself than it is by drilling, boating, etc., combined! In fact, us consumers as well as motorized boat operators are responsible for far more oil entering our oceans than any drilling does.

But back to my main point... this site is based on the motto of "denying ignorance". Your thread, and especially the title of it, completely contrast everything ATS stands for. If you're going to start a thread on something, then try being objective and report the FACTS. We get enough spin from the mainstream media. We don't need to come on here and get it from people like you. I apologize if I'm coming off as rude, but it really angers me when someone blatantly mischaracterizes a story or a person's views/words just to suit their own personal beliefs and agenda. And that is EXACTLY what the OP did with this thread.

I don't think there's any denying that today's oil prices are where they are mostly because of speculation. If you thought that was my opinion, then either you misinterpreted what I typed or I did a poor job of explaining myself. Eventually the government is going to step in and stop the speculation from happening on the scale it is right now and we'll be back to purely supply and demand.

As far as you winning the argument?

You sure haven't convinced me of anything. We have a fundamental disagreement on this and thus there isn't really any ways to "win" the argument. I do respect you a little more for eventually discussing the topic rather than continuing your angry, name-calling tirade.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


Actually Andrew, Bush was talking about how HIS lifting of the ban would do nothing, as there is still a congressional ban. But you have avoided all three of my threads regarding the truths behind the liberal bias towards our own energy independence.

But seeing as those threads were steeped in facts, and you prefer to take on those that deal in rhetoric, I'm guessing you didn't want to touch them.

Or try reading some of SEMPERFORTIS's great and well researched threads on the subject.

The ignorance behind some of your obviously biased threads kills me. But we all know you are paid to type what you type my friend. -Jason


Edit; I think I'm on Andrews ignore list. Can someone repost this? Thanks...

[edit on 15-7-2008 by jasonjnelson]

reply to post by Dronetek

Developing Africa needs LOTS of oil and coal to develop their country.

Looks like someone went to the George W. Bush School of Geography.
Africa is a continent....


....full of countries.

Some interesting information to attend to the subject at hand.

When (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi took over Congress last year, she said she would fix the energy crisis,” the Johnson City Republican said. “Oil was $56 a barrel the day she took over as speaker of the House. It’s now $102 a barrel ... to about $1.50 (per gallon) of gas up to over $3 for gas. That’s not where the American people want to go

Times News

Seems common sense would tell you to use your own resources.
It is against the law to drill for oil in our midwest, Atlantic and Pacific oceans, Gulf of Mexico east shelf and Alaska.

I fail to see the reasoning here. I hear the argument it would'nt help because it would be at least eight years before we could turn this into gas. Good My daughter will just be becoming old enough to drive.

Xomba

So McCain watches gas go through the roof and changes his mind having concern for us not being able to afford gas to go to work, and you demonize him for it.. Now that is classy..

You can explain away and spout hyperbole and opinions all you want to.

The fact remains that in 2006, the price of oil was around a third of what it is today, the economy was strong, jobs were at an all time high and the housing market was booming. What changed?

The Democrats took control of the House and the Senate. They knew that the quickest and most expedient way to get a Democrat into the Presidency was to destroy the economy, and they have succeeded. Like the loyal Liberals you all are, you are in perfect lock step with your Socialist Masters and swallowing all the hyperbole while ignoring the facts.

Liberals love excuses and hate the facts.

Semper

Originally posted by RRconservative


It's amazing that alot of people can't grasp the simple law of supply and demand.


[edit on 15-7-2008 by RRconservative]

It has absolutely nothing to do with supply and demand

If it was "Supply and demand" then why are the oil companies still setting on un-refined oil?

So you're saying giving them MORE un-refined oil is going to make things better?

HOW?

Now. As i've said countless times now

I'm for lifting the moratorium

but i am not for the notion that says the moratorium is the fault of the democrats, or that the high gas prices are anyone else's fault ASIDE from the Bush Administration.


FIRST spike in gas prices was 9/11
Then we had Katrina. Remember? Gas prices went up because the refineries got damaged.

Well the refineries got fixed, and *shocker* gas prices never went back down

now its the moratorium?

That was put into place by a republican?
Granted, Bill Clinton extended the moratorium, but that just shows how stupid bill clinton is.


George Bush said that the lifting of the moratorium will not have the impact that americans are looking for.

I say they all quit squabbling over the moratorium, lift it, drill for more oil. BUT i say that this is not enough, and you have to do more.

What that "more" is - i dunno - i dont get informed like the president does.

But i do say that if his only suggestion is to lift the moratorium, then his only motive is to help big oil.
Because it DOESN'T help Americans.

And to blue triangle. You can get mad at me all you want. The only political name calling i use is the ones that earn it.

If you blindly support a moritorium lift and think it will solve all the problems we're facing today - then i call you a Limbaugh looney.

I call you a bush minion
I call you a mccain supporter

And sorry if that offends you. If you're offended by these types of names, then you are, yourself, admitting that these names are bad. If calling someone a "rush baby" is a bad thing, then its because RUSH LIMBAUGH himself is an idiot

so is hannity
so is chris hardball or whatever his name is
so is John McCain
so is George Bush
So is nancy pelosi
So is barack obama


but! Who's had long to make changes? The Bush administration. Nothing has happened in 7 years, and you blame the democrats?

Get off it.

Originally posted by Grafilthy
reply to post by Dronetek

 

Developing Africa needs LOTS of oil and coal to develop their country.

Looks like someone went to the George W. Bush School of Geography.
Africa is a continent....


....full of countries.

Thats what I meant and you know it.

reply to post by semperfortis

The fact remains that in 2006, the price of oil was around a third of what it is today, the economy was strong, jobs were at an all time high and the housing market was booming. What changed?

You don't think going to war with basically all the OPEC countries has anything to do with this situation???

The McClatchy analysis found that the number of severely poor Americans grew by 26 percent from 2000 to 2005. That's 56 percent faster than the overall poverty population grew in the same period. McClatchy's review also found statistically significant increases in the percentage of the population in severe poverty in 65 of 215 large U.S. counties, and similar increases in 28 states. The review also suggested that the rise in severely poor residents isn't confined to large urban counties but extends to suburban and rural areas.

The plight of the severely poor is a distressing sidebar to an unusual economic expansion. Worker productivity has increased dramatically since the brief recession of 2001, but wages and job growth have lagged behind. At the same time, the share of national income going to corporate profits has dwarfed the amount going to wages and salaries. That helps explain why the median household income of working-age families, adjusted for inflation, has fallen for five straight years.

These and other factors have helped push 43 percent of the nation's 37 million poor people into deep poverty - the highest rate since at least 1975.

Sounds like prosperity to me.

Originally posted by semperfortis

The fact remains that in 2006, the price of oil was around a third of what it is today, the economy was strong, jobs were at an all time high and the housing market was booming. What changed?

First off, semper, how can you call me a "liberal"? IS it because i support Obama? Lets not have a double standard here, alright?

I am not a liberal, but i am NOT a conservative, i choose to support Obama for the things i've seen, not because a group of people say i have to.


SECONDLY

The price of gas in 2006 was 1/3 of what it is today?
LOL

Are you serious?

The national average was $2.90 in april of 2006


If it was $1.20 in 2001, one year after Bush, and $2.90 in April of 2006 (before democrats controlled the hill)

then you can do the figuring

That is a 141.6% increase before democrats took over, already on a steep incline.

So lets see.
Democrats took office in Jan of 2007

In may of 2007 the national average was $3.11

So from $2.90 to $3.11 you have a 7.25% increase and from $3.11 to today which was $4.11 you have a 32% increase in the cost of gasoline

so if ANYTHING

the presence of the democrats has slowed the overall climb in gas prices.

Republicans are out of control.

Its time for some change

This is pretty self-explanatory..



Now looking at the "Spike" previously mentioned, it appears to me to be about the time the Dems took office....

Here is the link to the site.

Gas Prices

Again, facts and not hyperbole

Semper

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

 

Actually Andrew, Bush was talking about how HIS lifting of the ban would do nothing, as there is still a congressional ban. But you have avoided all three of my threads regarding the truths behind the liberal bias towards our own energy independence.

But seeing as those threads were steeped in facts, and you prefer to take on those that deal in rhetoric, I'm guessing you didn't want to touch them.

Or try reading some of SEMPERFORTIS's great and well researched threads on the subject.

The ignorance behind some of your obviously biased threads kills me. But we all know you are paid to type what you type my friend. -Jason

While I tend to stand left of center on most issues, you've made several valid points here, Jason. The truth is every action requires a beginning. To expect any type of immediate effect from the lifting of this ban is fool hardy. However, we won't see an effect in the future if we don't implement it at all. You've got to start somewhere, which is what the point of lifting the ban.

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
Edit; I think I'm on Andrews ignore list...

ALOT of members believe they are on AEW's ignore list. However, I think he can only ignore 10 members at any given time. You must have been really special to make that list!

[edit on 7/15/2008 by maria_stardust]

reply to post by Dronetek


Sorry for the sucker punch.

First off, semper, how can you call me a "liberal"? IS it because i support Obama? Lets not have a double standard here, alright?

It is not in anyway intended as a double standard or insult and I am sorry of you took it that way.

If I see a road going over a river, I call it a bridge.

If I see a bright light in the eastern sky in the morning, I call it the sun.

You have extreme Liberal Ideas and almost all of your posts are to the extreme left.

I am sorry of the name Liberal offends you, but that is how you have appeared in every sense of the word.

Semper

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
so if ANYTHING

the presence of the democrats has slowed the overall climb in gas prices.

Republicans are out of control.

Its time for some change

Holy cow, now that's something I haven't heard yet. That really takes the cake.

If that's so great, how come you don't hear the Dems spouting off about it. "Hey, gang, we slowed down the climbing of gas prices!!"

Slowing down doesn't mean much. It's still going up, and the Dems were using the platform of "low gas prices" to get elected.

And, like Republicans, the Dems screwed everyone.

Originally posted by semperfortis

The fact remains that in 2006, the price of oil was around a third of what it is today, the economy was strong, jobs were at an all time high and the housing market was booming. What changed?

My dearest friend, you know that is a load of BS.

But I still love you.

reply to post by marg6043


I'm glad you still love me.. You know it is returned...

Yet it is all right there for anyone to see....

It is not my opinion, it is presented factual data.

Semper

reply to post by BlueTriangle


Well thank you BlueTriangle for respecting at least one thing I say, now I feel all warm and fuzzy. And I do mean tha seriously.

Back on topic when are we going to stop placing blame and do what we can to change the way things are run around here.

OH crud, I forgot something.....when I was on my "tirade" I had a very good reason to be. You have yet to show me a reason to calm down.

This is also confusing to me...

Title of Thread:

Republicans concede: Lifting Moratorium = Pointless

Excerpt from OP's source

Bush acknowledged it could take years before opening the Continental Shelf to oil drilling would result in increased U.S. production. But, he said, at least it would put the nation on the right track toward reducing its reliance on imported oil.

"There is no short term solution," Bush said. "The president doesn't have a magic wand. You can't just say, 'Low gas."

OP Source
Emphasis Mine

Where exactly did it say "Pointless"???

Semper

reply to post by semperfortis


I see.

So we're going to continue calling me names
we're going to continue saying im being paid to do this

we're going to continue to avoid the issues
and we're going to continue being silly on everything?

oh, we're also going to continue avoiding my last post.

No comments about the % increase in prices?

How it rose so fast before democrats came into power
and declined so fast afterwards?

You said it yourself in a previous post

"its not like a microwave where you can expect change in 15 seconds"

but you expect the democratic congress to make changes in 1.5 years time?
You expect them to reverse all of the damage caused by the bush administration so fast?

Another double standard.

I dont have faith in congress. I've stated quite the opposite of this many times.

My problem is all of you who say its "the democrats" fault because "they control the house"

They have had control of the house for 1.5 years.

Bush has had control of the presidency for 7, and a republican based congress prior to 2007. And we are met with all these challenges

it really puts me beside myself with laughter and anger the more and more i read from you people

You come in here and avoid facts and say "hehehehe stupid liberal...by the way STOP NAME CALLING"

Here's a name that be suits you best

Hypocrite.

You wear it well.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


YOU DONT NEED A MAJORITY TO BLOCK BILLS IN THE HOUSE< ESPECIALLY INVOLVING DRILLING!!!!!!