democrats want control of the oil

#76
#76
BigPapaVol said:
there's no mystery here. The environmental lobby has held them hostage for decades and are the only reason that drilling in the ANWR (Sadat) is unpalatable for them.

The green loonies have gone so far as to make much of the press buy that drilling there would kill jillions of polar bears. Must be nice to have total (or nearly total) complicity from the press.
Click to expand...

I understand why the politicians do it. I just wonder why people like FV, that will most likely vote D, aren't up in arms about this. I can say one thing for the Repubs/Conservatives on here, they seem more likely to call one of "their guys" out for policies they disagree with them about. The dems/liberals seem to stay much more in lock step with whatever their candidates propose.
 
#77
#77
Vol Mania 21 said:
i like fv, nothing against him. we just don't agree on politics is all
Click to expand...
I like the debating and get a good feel for other views from people and that helps me see a bigger picture and form a more informed opinion on the subjects. As far as being politically smart I am beneath most people posting in the political forum.
 
#78
#78
allvol123 said:
I understand why the politicians do it. I just wonder why people like FV, that will most likely vote D, aren't up in arms about this. I can say one thing for the Repubs/Conservatives on here, they seem more likely to call one of "their guys" out for policies they disagree with them about. The dems/liberals seem to stay much more in lock step with whatever their candidates propose.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of that is because the vast majority of liberal viewpoints rely heavily upon an emotional argument, just as ANWR (Sadat) drilling does. When logic isn't driving thinking, it's easy to imagine folks falling in lockstep.
 
#79
#79
allvol123 said:
I understand why the politicians do it. I just wonder why people like FV, that will most likely vote D, aren't up in arms about this. I can say one thing for the Repubs/Conservatives on here, they seem more likely to call one of "their guys" out for policies they disagree with them about. The dems/liberals seem to stay much more in lock step with whatever their candidates propose.
Click to expand...
The same reason you aren't UP IN ARMS about the president going to war by lying to us and using WMDs for the reason. Remember I did not vote for him.
 
#81
#81
Fine Vol said:
The same reason you aren't UP IN ARMS about the president going to war by lying to us and using WMDs for the reason. Remember I did not vote for him.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily have a problem with the war BUT a lot of Rs do. It is not a position people fall in lockstep on the R side. While it may have not been the perfect plan, it doesn't desrve the outrage and nonsensical coverage it receives.
 
#82
#82
BigPapaVol said:
I think a lot of that is because the vast majority of liberal viewpoints rely heavily upon an emotional argument, just as ANWR (Sadat) drilling does. When logic isn't driving thinking, it's easy to imagine folks falling in lockstep.
Click to expand...

I've served my time. :happy:
 
#83
#83
Fine Vol said:
The same reason you aren't UP IN ARMS about the president going to war by lying to us and using WMDs for the reason. Remember I did not vote for him.
Click to expand...
how does that pertain to McCain v Obama?

I'm not up in arms because I didn't view WMD as the reason we went to war with Saddam. While that was a part of the reason, it wasn't the driver for the ouster of Saddam. I actually appreciate the long-term ramifications of a US presence in Iraq.
 
#84
#84
BigPapaVol said:
I think a lot of that is because the vast majority of liberal viewpoints rely heavily upon an emotional argument, just as ANWR (Sadat) drilling does. When logic isn't driving thinking, it's easy to imagine folks falling in lockstep.
Click to expand...
How is that HIGH POWERED LOGIC working for the man YOU put in office?
 
#86
#86
Fine Vol said:
How is that HIGH POWERED LOGIC working for the man YOU put in office?
Click to expand...
he has been an economic failure because he deviated from using any logic in approving every spending bill ever put in front of him.

I know it feels good to pay for everything and make people happy, but it makes no logical sense to approve all of the spending that he has.
 
#88
#88
This is just ridiculous, IMO.

The headline reads that "Democrats" want the government control oil. Then you read the article and in fact its ONE guy making a remark about the government owning refineries.

Granted, he's a numskull and its an absurd notion. It would never happen. But his making that one remark is hardly "Democrats" taking a position on something like that.

And from there its off to the races.

Typical Fox News tactic.
 
#89
#89
lawgator1 said:
This is just ridiculous, IMO.

The headline reads that "Democrats" want the government control oil. Then you read the article and in fact its ONE guy making a remark about the government owning refineries.

Granted, he's a numskull and its an absurd notion. It would never happen. But his making that one remark is hardly "Democrats" taking a position on something like that.

And from there its off to the races.

Typical Fox News tactic.
Click to expand...


Well since they are for restricting access to oil, in a sense they are controlling oil.
 
#91
#91
lawgator1 said:
This is just ridiculous, IMO.

The headline reads that "Democrats" want the government control oil. Then you read the article and in fact its ONE guy making a remark about the government owning refineries.

Granted, he's a numskull and its an absurd notion. It would never happen. But his making that one remark is hardly "Democrats" taking a position on something like that.

And from there its off to the races.

Typical Fox News tactic.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's two people. Maxine Waters started the commentary during hearings with Oil Execs. This guy followed up today.

That's a 100% increase in voiced support by democrats :)
 
#92
#92
volinbham said:
Actually, it's two people. Maxine Waters started the commentary during hearings with Oil Execs. This guy followed up today.

That's a 100% increase in voiced support by democrats :)
Click to expand...
Everyone behind it supports it to their utmost, 100% of them are democrats and the support doubles daily. Has runaway train written all over it.
 
#93
#93
allvol123 said:
Well since they are for restricting access to oil, in a sense they are controlling oil.
Click to expand...


That was hardly the point. Fox News took a quote form one guy and labels it the platform for "Democrats." I mean, please.



BigPapaVol said:
Good call. Fox is really bad about that. Good thing we have ALL of the rest of the media shooting straight with us.
Click to expand...


I understand the argument the conservatives make that the media on the whole is biased to the left. Even if that were so, and I don't necessarily disagree, that would hardly seem to justify such shoddy journalism on their part.

If they want to report on things that they believe help the right, that's okay. But don't take one guy's comment and try to scare people into thinking that nationalizing oil is the first order of business with a Democratically controlled Congress.
 
#95
#95
Fine Vol said:
1. I have no idea?
2. Using stereotypes is silly and makes you look bad. Here is one for you! SO KEN you cant wait to go to war even if it is not justified. YOU are only going to war to take oil wells and you are willing to risk American lives to do so. You are OK lying to the whole country so you can achieve you $ based objective and you only give a damn about the RICH!!!!! So KEN does that define you?

3. I will not loan you my windmill so you can blow all of your BS around.
Click to expand...

I lived long enough to recognize that stereotypes exist for a reason and are usually fairly accurate.

We didn't force Kuwait to funnel oil to us and we are now getting less crude from Iraq than before the war, so tell me again how we go to war for oil.

How long would you have taken attacks before striking back? We did for almost 30 years. Both parties bear responsibility for that.

I will listen to anyone that argues using facts. Using only media rhetoric as their basis of arguement is no fun and accomplishes nothing.
 
#96
#96
lawgator1 said:
That was hardly the point. Fox News took a quote form one guy and labels it the platform for "Democrats." I mean, please.






I understand the argument the conservatives make that the media on the whole is biased to the left. Even if that were so, and I don't necessarily disagree, that would hardly seem to justify such shoddy journalism on their part.

If they want to report on things that they believe help the right, that's okay. But don't take one guy's comment and try to scare people into thinking that nationalizing oil is the first order of business with a Democratically controlled Congress.
Click to expand...

Scaremongering is a personal favorite of the republican party.
 
#97
#97
KentheOrange said:
I lived long enough to recognize that stereotypes exist for a reason and are usually fairly accurate.

We didn't force Kuwait to funnel oil to us and we are now getting less crude from Iraq than before the war, so tell me again how we go to war for oil.

How long would you have taken attacks before striking back? We did for almost 30 years. Both parties bear responsibility for that.

I will listen to anyone that argues using facts. Using only media rhetoric as their basis of arguement is no fun and accomplishes nothing.
Click to expand...


I have to say, even as one who opposes the war (in general terms -- I agree that we have to find a sensible way out), I have never believed that we went to Iraq thinking we'd end up controlling their oil fields.

I personally think we did it because of a combination of a genuine albeit mistaken belief that Saddam was a significant threat to us, 9/11, the Bush administration having a predeliction for wanting to take out Hussein after the first Gulf War, and some bad intelligence made worse by those who were reading it with an eye towards what they already believed.

Now, we can argue all we want about how we got there. But we are there and I am skeptical of any plan that just draws down troops with no plan to transition reasonably to the Iraqi government.
 
#99
#99
They can have the refining business. It sucks so bad right now anyway. Look at the pure play refining stocks...TSO, SUN, VLO, FTO All down 60-70% YTD. XOM, BP, COP are all down in the past 6 months while oil is up huge because they are losing money hand over fist in the refining business.

Once again The Refining Business SUCKS!!!
 
#100
#100
615 Vol said:
Scaremongering is a personal favorite of the republican party.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious. Nothing the repubs have ever done in the way of scaremongering can even begin to compare to the fear-induced snowjob the libs have pulled in the global warming arena.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top