Bush Calls for Easing Offshore Drilling Restrictions

[delldude]

So to prevent that, Bush and Cheney launch a "tactical nuke" strike before Iran can do anything. You know..better to stop them now than let them do anything. And Cheney has already pondered tactical nukes in Iraq. This administration is the only one in the civilized world that has pondered an OFFENSIVE nuclear attack.

Do you remember this civilized country's remarks?

CHICOM GENERAL PRACTICES NUCLEAR BLINKMANSHIP

" ‘If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition onto the target zone on China’s territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons,’ Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu said in yesterday’s editions of the Financial Times and the Asian Wall Street Journal."

PRC CLAIMS TAIWAN STRAITS OWNERSHIP

"The comments were the most explicit statement of strategic intent by a Chinese military official since 1995, when another officer, Gen. Xiong Guangkai, implicitly threatened to use nuclear arms against Los Angeles if the United States intervened in a Taiwan conflict.

" ‘If the Americans are determined to interfere … we will be determined to respond,’ said Gen. Zhu, head of China’s National Defense University. ‘We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian [in central China]. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds … of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese.’ …

"A Pentagon official, speaking on background, said Chinese generals normally express only official positions and that Gen. Zhu’s comments represent the views of senior officers. …"

CHINA ABANDONS "NO FIRST USE" PLEDGE

"The statements contradict China’s publicly stated policy that it will not be the first nation to use nuclear weapons in a conflict. Gen. Zhu was quoted as saying he believed the no-first-use policy applied only to non-nuclear states and could be changed.

"He said Beijing is under internal pressure to change the no-first-use policy and to announce that it will use the most powerful weapons at its disposal to defend its claim on Taiwan. He stated that ‘war logic’ requires weaker powers to use all means to defeat a stronger rival. …"

Hop Sing awakes to see carrier battle groups heading for Taiwan.....first strike on the way.

 

[KCFlyer]

Do you remember this civilized country's remarks?





Hop Sing awakes to see carrier battle groups heading for Taiwan.....first strike on the way.

Wow...mark your calendar - Dell called China "civilized".

 

[Tug McGroin]

Check out "Joe American", he has an energy plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPch2k63uj4

 

[KCFlyer]

Check out "Joe American", he has an energy plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPch2k63uj4

Even he said there was 7 years worth. That's even more conservative of a guess than I have. So what happens after 7 years? When our "national habitat" is totally dependent on foreign oil? When we use more oil than any other country in the world, and our own oil is not nearly enough to last us more than 20 years, then how do we gain "energy indepenence". I think it's cute to ask Iraq to pay for a war that they didn't wage. Sort of a "I broke it - you buy it" kind of policy. And I thought the tax breaks given to oil companies were supposed to create jobs and go towards alternative energy sources...can we end those breaks.

 

[local 12 proud]

...And what exactly, pray tell have the deomocrats done over the past thirty years to wean us off fossil fuel?

 

[delldude]

...And what exactly, pray tell have the deomocrats done over the past thirty years to wean us off fossil fuel?

Why they sold our oil futures to the Greenies for campaign monies......duh.

Don't drill,we got PAC money......

 

[KCFlyer]

...And what exactly, pray tell have the deomocrats done over the past thirty years to wean us off fossil fuel?

About as much as the republicans. Although they have tried several times to have SUV's included in the CAFE standards, they were pretty much shot down.

 

[delldude]

Democrats do something,finally

 

[cooper43]

The longer we wait to improve our position, one can assume the MORE dependent we become and the worse our plight.

You could use the same argument for developing the technologies we already have to reduce our oil consumption. Instead of drilling we could make cars that get at least 50 mpg (it can be done now). Spend money on expanding public transit across the country. It will take a multi fascited aproach. There are so many things we can do now that would have an immediate effect if we had the will and leadership to do it. I am not totally opposed to drilling but just not my first choice. It really doesnt help our problem in the long run. We as a culture should be moving toward decreasing our environmental footprint. Creating a new industry of safe renewable fuels would create tons of new jobs.

 

[American Air Surf]

But the overall philosophy is to see how little we can hurt Mother Nature and we can only do that by having as little impact as possible.



I believe that is the left' argument but I am not sure it works. From what I see and read, most realize that easy oil is going to be a thing of the past and we are not going to be able to go back to dollar gasoline but we MAY be able to keep it from going to $10 gas IF we develop new ways to extract the oil. It seems the argument is we need to explore new technologies as long as it does not involve anything to do with oil

Another argument is that it is going to take so long for the deep water oil to come on line. Well.. the fact is tomorrow we are one day closer to the 2020 or 2030 calendar and I would rather address the problem now rather than keep putting it off in hopes that wind/solar/X is going to solve the problem. And I think the ethanol charade adequately demonstrates the point. One thing effects another and what looked like a great thing is now being shown to be a not so great idea. Costly, subsidized, rendering less BTU per gallon... but for some reason no one has the ***** to say, "You know, we are on the wrong path... we need to stop this." They can offer that rationale for the war, the economy, foreign policy but when it comes to a pet project of the left, there is silence. ???



I am not arguing for $2, $3 or $4 gas. I am arguing against doing nothing and having $10 gas. Habits are in fact changing. We here change, change, change but anyone who has studied culture or human factors knows it takes considerable time for a culture change within an AIRLINE, much less a country. The process is not immediate but from what I read, a lot of people are 'getting it'.

Richard Rainwater, (associate)- of the Bass Brothers in Ft. Worth, TX got it. All the way back in FORTUNE article 12/26/05.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/for.../12/26/8364646/

 

[cooper43]

...And what exactly, pray tell have the deomocrats done over the past thirty years to wean us off fossil fuel?

You are right the dems have failed to wean us off fossil fuels, and its their fault. The republicans helped fill thier pockets with campaign contributions from big oil. Big oil then helped elect GW then they wrote the countries energy policy for the next 8 years. Now they are making record profits with tax breaks (that is mine and your hard earned tax money) and we are paying for it double. Thanks, GW.

 

[Cosworth]

I love how we blame government for doing what we elected them to do. When is the last time any candidate actually present a viable plan for anything? When is the last time a candidate ever said that we have a problem that we caused and we need to fix it? When has a candidate ever told us we were greedy and selfish and we need to think of others?

We got exactly what we voted for. If you want to assign blame, look in the mirror. "... of the people, by the people, for the people,...". "We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us"

 

[Seatacus]

When is the last time any candidate actually present a viable plan for anything?

Does the 1994 Contract with America by Newt and his pals count?

 

[Cosworth]

Does the 1994 Contract with America by Newt and his pals count?

I said viable not laughable.

I just looked it up to refresh my memory.

* FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;
* SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
* THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
* FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;
* FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
* SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;
* SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
* EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

I have not researched any of the above but did they do any of the above?

 

[local 12 proud]

You could use the same argument for developing the technologies we already have to reduce our oil consumption. Instead of drilling we could make cars that get at least 50 mpg (it can be done now). Spend money on expanding public transit across the country. It will take a multi fascited aproach. There are so many things we can do now that would have an immediate effect if we had the will and leadership to do it. I am not totally opposed to drilling but just not my first choice. It really doesnt help our problem in the long run. We as a culture should be moving toward decreasing our environmental footprint. Creating a new industry of safe renewable fuels would create tons of new jobs.

Yea the bread basket of the globe should consider mass transit when they harvest!....

You have never been too the midwest, obviously chucklenuts!