How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Oil well, well, well....   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Oil well, well, well....

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


25 posted 03-03-2011 11:02 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Would you ever consider a Democrat?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


26 posted 03-03-2011 11:17 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Believe it or not, I would, depending on his priorities. I was solidly behind Kennedy. If a democrats runs who is not  for bigger government and more governmental control and has the qualifications I would need to see, I would certainly consider him.

I voted against Rick Scott, the republican new governor of Florida because I didn't trust him or admire his character. I still don't.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


27 posted 03-03-2011 11:20 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Nod.

I don't think you and I are so far apart.

I've never voted for a president before.

I've only voted against 'em.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


28 posted 03-03-2011 11:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


29 posted 03-03-2011 11:27 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Maybe you'll get a chance to vote for a Kennedy again...

I think his time has come.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


30 posted 03-03-2011 11:38 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

One little thing, Mike.

You said:

"Believe it or not, I would, depending on his priorities. I was solidly behind Kennedy. If a democrats runs who is not  for bigger government and more governmental control and has the qualifications I would need to see, I would certainly consider him."

In today's world politic, and I have asked this question before--what would any candidate have to promise and deliver in regards to a comparative promise of small government in a world of huge corporations, that are, apparently, too big to fail?

Don't wince, please.

It's a legitimate question.

I'd like to know what a presidential candidate would have to say in answer to that question for you to vote for him.

An open question to all of you, silently reading this, btw....
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


31 posted 03-04-2011 05:59 AM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


quote:
I know that, when I lived in Venezuela, gasoline was 6 cents per gallon at the time there were lines miles long in front of gas stations in the U.S. (early 70'). Apparently there was some advantage to Venezuela for having their domestic oil. The oil companies were not nationalized at the time.


That would be around the time of the OPEC oil embargo Mike. Members of OPEC, including Venezuela who were founding members, stopped exporting oil to the US causing a shortage, which explains the long queues at the American pumps. The low price in Venezuela? That's partly explained by the glut caused in the producing countries because of the embargo but was also due to the fact that Venezuela did actual have domestic oil in the true sense of the term. Although not fully nationalised in the early 70's the Hydrocarbons Act of 1943 introduced a 50/50 split clause into any agreed oil concession - 50% of the oil went to the oil companies and 50% was allocated for subsidised domestic consumption.

In the early 1970's you were buying fuel at refinery cost only Mike.

Karen,

What's the answer?

I believe that the clue is in something that Sheikh Yamani, former OPEC oil minister, said:

"The Stone Age Didn't End Because We Ran Out of Stones"

He was arguing at the time against increasing oil prices to a level that might force consumer nations to look for better and cheaper alternatives - it's basically a confirmation of Ron's argument from the horse's mouth. This guy is convinced that high prices would trigger an evolutionary move away from oil, so is Ron and so am I.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


32 posted 03-04-2011 08:06 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Karen, your question is DEFINITELY fodder for a different thread.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


33 posted 03-04-2011 12:56 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"This guy is convinced that high prices would trigger an evolutionary move away from oil, "


And with what damage to the economy
and jobs in the interim?  With a lot of people
with no paychecks it could trigger a evolutionary move
away from buildings to underpasses.
.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


34 posted 03-04-2011 04:11 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Okay.  

I'm gonna go put on some blinkie beads.



Happy, happy, joy, joy!

see ya'll at the parades.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


35 posted 03-04-2011 04:45 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Good point, John. We have a president who rammed through a multi-billion dollar "stimulus" package, citing that the country would go down the tubes without it's immediate passage, rushed it through congress without the congressmen even reading it, and got it enacted into law, promising a falling unemployment rate and shovel ready jobs, which were non-existant.

Now the same president rejects, and even fights against, the ability to give jobs to tens of thousands of Americans by not endorsing oil drilling and exploration.

I fail to see the logic in that....
Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


36 posted 03-04-2011 06:03 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas

quote:
And with what damage to the economy
and jobs in the interim?


About the same as the transition from steam to oil I guess - definitely a lot less than waiting for the oil to  run out without having a viable alternative in place.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


37 posted 03-04-2011 07:11 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"viable alternative"


Critical . . .

And one that doesn't theatren the American burying beetle.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


38 posted 03-04-2011 08:36 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     This is a classic economic issue of guns versus butter; that is, do we do the thing that gives short term comfort and ease (the butter side of the issue), or do we bite the bullet and go for what's the long term payoff (Guns, which will give us a better chance of survival).  Again, classically, Republicans have taken the guns side of the issue over and over again.  This is one of the appealing things about Republican ideology; they classically see the point in deferred gratification.

     In this case, however, the Republicans seem to have flipped sides, and they argue for the short term benefit while giving only lip service to the need for long term change.  Sometimes, the short term benefits are for multi-national companies rather than for the United States, as in the case of suggesting we increase drilling in the United States when the supplies will not go to the United States.

     Indeed, the Republican position is that we should not tax the oil companies and should, in addition, continue the 60 billion dollar per year corporate welfare program they enjoy from our taxpayers.  60 Billion here, 60 Billion there, soon enough it adds up to real money.  We are essentially paying these bozos to pick our pockets.

     I shouldn't complain too much about previous comments in this thread about the pump priming program and the money it cost.  I feel it was money well spent.  I would like to point out that if folks criticize the President's bail-out program, that it would be more consistent if they also criticized President Bush's bail out program, which came first and was, if I remember correctly, larger.  

     As I said before, however, I can't complain too much since I supported that bail out program as well; even though it was "rammed through" by Republicans, and even though it was targeted in what seems to me to be a less efficient way, it was still a useful plan.  It's a pity that so many Republicans have developed amnesia about it now.

     As they have developed amnesia about their dire predictions about other areas of the economic bail-out, such as the recovery of G.M.  It is clearly a partisan world, and my Right Wing Friends will surely be able to cite Democratic oversights as well.

    
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


39 posted 03-04-2011 09:48 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

How do we heat our homes and fuel our cars until affordable viable alternatives are discovered or created?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


40 posted 03-04-2011 10:13 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Guess those tens of thousands of jobs aren't worthy of comment, John. I'm not surprised...


My mistake...make that hundreds of thousands...
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


41 posted 03-05-2011 01:45 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
And with what damage to the economy
and jobs in the interim?

It will be accompanied by a LOT of damage to the economy, John. It's called paying for your mistakes, and it's a bill that always comes due sooner or later.

quote:
Now the same president rejects, and even fights against, the ability to give jobs to tens of thousands of Americans by not endorsing oil drilling and exploration.

Which jobs are you talking about, Mike? The ones for pulling the stuff out of the ground? Or the ones for cleaning the stuff out of the Gulf? If all you care about is jobs, maybe we should blow up a few more deep water oil rigs so we can put people to work?

Sarcasm aside, Mike, all jobs are not created equal. Some jobs NEED to go away.

quote:
How do we heat our homes and fuel our cars until affordable viable alternatives are discovered or created?

Denise, how do you intend to heat your home or fuel your car when NO affordable viable alternatives are ever discovered? Do you honestly think the cheap energy is going to last forever? It won't, and what follows will almost surely be more painful and substantially more expensive than tapping into several millions of years worth of stored energy. And that's a real problem because, in a capitalist society, no one is going to spend their own money developing a more expensive solution no one really wants. We're not going to seriously start looking until we have to. And by then, it may well be too late.

The real question, Denise, is how do your grandchildren heat THEIR homes when you've already used up all the cheap energy?

quote:
Guess those tens of thousands of jobs aren't worthy of comment, John. I'm not surprised...

Did you skip over Uncas's reply to John, Mike? His comment pretty much covered the issue and the only reason I'm using up a few minutes of my day to say essentially the same thing is because you seem to have missed it the first time.

Those tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs are going to be in jeopardy sooner or later, Mike, no matter how you want to paint it. If your job is to pump something out of the ground, your job is inevitably going to go away when that something is depleted. Oil is a non-renewable energy source. The question has never been "What do we do?" The only real question is, "When do we do it?" Either you and I can start the process now, knowing full well it may take decades to see results, or we can leave the problem for our kids and grandkids to face, hoping it won't already be too late by the time they get a chance to solve it.

Frankly, I think it's bad enough you want to use up all the cheap energy and leave next to nothing for our children, but it's so much worse that you're willing to tear up the planet to do it.

And Mike? Please stop turning every damn issue into an us versus them tirade. You don't like the Democrats. We got it already. You don't like Obama. Yea, we got that, too. Is it even marginally possible for you to discuss the merits of an issue without going all partisan on us, without bringing in every single gripe you've griped since 2008? The Stimulus package? Give me a break, bro. Looking for inconsistencies in political agendas, yours or theirs, isn't going to solve any of our problems. It just irritates a few people and bores the hell out of the rest of us.

Try it, Mike. Tell us what you think about the issue, not what you think about the current administration. You might just like it.


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


42 posted 03-05-2011 08:26 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"It's called paying for your mistakes"


Wood and the horse were better?


.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


43 posted 03-05-2011 09:45 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Oil and gas are not cheap as it is, Ron. (Last week I had to fork over $326 for 1/3 of a tank of fuel oil...this week it would have cost me $370 or $1110 to fill my tank) and getting more expensive as time goes by, partly due to the economic downturn worldwide, partly due to the unrest in the Middle East, and, in defense of Mike's position, partly due to the policies coming out of this Administration. And Mike has never irritated or bored me by expressing his opinions on those counter-productive policies. I think the only people that he may annoy are those on the left, and the only people he may bore are those not seriously engaged on the issues and who find themselves bored by anything other than Charlie Sheen's latest tweet!

I am of the opinion that we should utilize every resource available to us, including oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy, and investing in wind and solar technologies, and finding ways to make solar technology affordable to the average person, which right now, it isn't. We should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. The answer is not in putting the brakes on the oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power industries in order to force investment in viable alternatives. We can responsibly utilize our current resources while continuing to search for those alternatives for the future, in my opinion. A decimated economy and way of life is not something we want to bequeath to our children and grandchildren.

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


44 posted 03-05-2011 11:13 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

quote:
I am of the opinion that we should utilize every resource available to us, including oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy, and investing in wind and solar technologies, and finding ways to make solar technology affordable to the average person, which right now, it isn't. We should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. The answer is not in putting the brakes on the oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power industries in order to force investment in viable alternatives. We can responsibly utilize our current resources while continuing to search for those alternatives for the future, in my opinion. A decimated economy and way of life is not something we want to bequeath to our children and grandchildren.


Well said.  "Responsibly" is the key.  

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


45 posted 03-05-2011 12:19 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Wood and the horse were better?

Wood and horse were renewable, John. And, yea, that's better. Not in the short term, of course, but almost certainly in the long term.

Don't get me wrong. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using our fossil fuels. That's not the mistake we're going to pay dearly for. The mistake was building an economy, indeed an entire society, on something everyone knew couldn't last. An economy that depends on cheap nonrenewable energy is doomed, John. It's as simple as that.

quote:
Oil and gas are not cheap as it is, Ron.

Yea, Denise, they are. They're cheaper than virtually any other alternative and probably cheaper than any possible alternative. There will never be another time in the history of the planet when we can dig our energy out of the ground with virtually no effort. From this point on, we have to start working for our energy.

p.s. While I still maintain that oil and gas are cheap, Denise, I don't deny that getting them delivered is painfully expensive for many. That's not because the fuels are expensive, though. It's because you're making some rich people a lot richer. The question that's up in the air is whether that will change in the future. Our next source of energy WILL be more expensive than fossil fuels, guaranteed. Ask any scientist and, if he's honest with you, you'll get the same answer. It's simple physics. It remains to be seen, however, whether that jump in the cost of energy will still be accompanied by a system that makes the deliverer exceedingly wealthy in the process.

quote:
And Mike has never irritated or bored me by expressing his opinions on those counter-productive policies.

LOL. I think we all knew that, Denise. I should have added a third alternative just for you -- preaching to the choir. None of three, of course, address the issues.

quote:
The answer is not in putting the brakes on the oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power industries in order to force investment in viable alternatives. We can responsibly utilize our current resources while continuing to search for those alternatives for the future, in my opinion.

We're in complete agreement, Denise, except perhaps over the word 'responsibly.' I don't think dumping millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf was responsible, and I suspect you don't either. It was, however, absolutely inevitable. Just like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were inevitable. People make mistakes. Only a fool refuses to plan for those mistakes.

Here's the thing, though.

In spite of the inevitable dangers of nuclear energy, I still support it. Why? Because I think it has a future. At least I hope it does. There are going to be mistakes and those mistakes are going to upset our environment. Perhaps even devastate our environment. But I think we'll survive, we'll learn, and we'll get better. Oil, however, has no future. None, nada, zilch. When we upset our environment in pursuit of oil, Denise, when we devastate it as recently happened, we get no long term benefits. We end up with a planet pocked with festering wounds . . . and still inevitably run out of reachable reserves of oil. I believe the long term costs far exceeds the short term benefits. Especially when there aren't ANY long term benefits.

The worse part, Denise, is that the course you and Mike advocate isn't even going to get you the cheaper energy you want. Uncas has already explained why. All it will accomplish is to continue making those rich people a lot richer for a little longer.


Uncas
Member
since 07-30-2010
Posts 348


46 posted 03-05-2011 12:54 PM       View Profile for Uncas   Email Uncas   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Uncas


quote:
I am of the opinion that we should utilize every resource available to us


As I said in my first post Denise I think you should let BP utilize your resources too and hopefully you'll continue to buy them back at full market value. It won't reduce your energy costs and they'll probably make a fair old mess doing it, but it does wonders for the dividend on my shares.



Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


47 posted 03-05-2011 03:36 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

If all you care about is jobs, maybe we should blow up a few more deep water oil rigs so we can put people to work?

That staement is not worthy of someone with your intelligence, Ron. Hopefully you are not that proud of it.

Those tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs are going to be in jeopardy sooner or later, Mike, no matter how you want to paint it. If your job is to pump something out of the ground, your job is inevitably going to go away when that something is depleted.

I see. Perhaps you could stand before those hundreds of thousands and explain to them that, since oil will run out in future centuries, it would be silly to create those jobs for them now. Let me know how that works out. For that matter, parents could advise their children that they don't  need to not smoke, drink, take drugs or even have occasional medical exams because, no matter what they do, the fact is they they are going to die some day and there's nothing they can do about it, so why bother?

Either you and I can start the process now, knowing full well it may take decades to see results, or we can leave the problem for our kids and grandkids to face, hoping it won't already be too late by the time they get a chance to solve it.

By all means, let's start the process. I have no problem with that. I'm no scientist but I will certainly applaud every one capable of tackling this problem. What does that have to do with you or I? We can do our best to cut down on our consumption, of course. For that matter, so can our administration. Do you see that happening?

It's always interesting when people talk about leaving problems for their children and grandchildren. That concerns you, Ron? Then I wonder how much it concerns you that Obama's spending has saddled our children and grandchildren with a debt practically impossible to handle? If you want to look for ways our children/grandchildren are being put in jeopardy, look there. I've seen you express no concern over that.

Is it even marginally possible for you to discuss the merits of an issue without going all partisan on us, without bringing in every single gripe you've griped since 2008?

I AM discussing the merits of the issue, Ron. Unfortunately, the issue puts Obama in an unfavorable light. Don't blame me for that. He is the one preventing off-shore drilling, against federal law, and the one halting further oil exploration. You want me to discuss the issue without having him in it? Perhaps you would like to discuss a man's 60 inch girth without mentioning the 3 pounds of Cheetoes he eats every day. The stimulus package which draws a "not again" mutter from you? It shows Obama demanded billions to create jobs he didn't create and now does nothing to create hundreds of thousands of jobs he could create with the slide of a pen.

Tell us what you think about the issue, not what you think about the current administration.

Just how...when the administration is in charge of the current situation? When the administration will decide how this issue is handled? Again, you want to discuss the weight without the Cheetos.

And Mike? Please stop turning every damn issue into an us versus them tirade

You make me wonder where you have been during the two Bush terms. The Alley was constantly bombarded with anti-Bush threads, everything from WMD's to the most ridiculous petty things small minds could come up with. I saw no complaints from you then about tirades. "The past eight years" was repeated enough times to qualify as a tribal chant and I saw no chastisement from you. Now, though, since it is Obama and not Bush, all of a sudden the topics and references to them are irritating and boring. What does that say?

By calling me on my bias you are simply illustrating your own.

Thank you, Denise, for your comment. You don't deserve the insult.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


48 posted 03-05-2011 05:35 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Cheaper fuel isn't the issue, Ron and Uncas. Growing our economy by creating jobs is, as is having access to oil even if the Middle East supply is severely reduced or stops flowing entirely for a time. We cannot afford to be held hostage by OPEC as they use supply and pricing as a weapon against us. Didn't our leaders learn anything from the '70's?

Europe and the U.S. can't become completely independent of them, but increasing availability elsewhere other than in OPEC countries could reduce their stranglehold over our economies and way of life until we are able to implement some of those viable alternatives.

And surely, Ron, you don't have to create a category just for me. Odds are that there are more folks around here than just me who also agree completely, or in large part, with Mike too.

You're welcome, Michael.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


49 posted 03-05-2011 05:46 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I AM discussing the merits of the issue, Ron. Unfortunately, the issue puts Obama in an unfavorable light. Don't blame me for that. He is the one preventing off-shore drilling, against federal law, and the one halting further oil exploration. You want me to discuss the issue without having him in it?

Not necessarily (though you might note that the only time I've mentioned a politician was in direct response to a question about that politician). What I'd like to do is discuss the issue without talking about every other issue since Obama graduated high school. Go back and read what you wrote, Mike.

"We have a president who rammed through a multi-billion dollar "stimulus" package, citing that the country would go down the tubes without it's immediate passage, rushed it through congress without the congressmen even reading it, and got it enacted into law, promising a falling unemployment rate and shovel ready jobs, which were non-existant."

I could respond to every singe gripe you've listed there, Mike -- I counted six -- but I shouldn't have to. Not in a thread that is ostensibly about oil. I don't have any problem at all with you going off again on Obama, Mike. Feel free to go start a thread on the stimulus package if you want. Start a thread on the last two years as seen from the eyes of a Republican. I don't care. All I ask is that you stop bringing it into EVERY thread, whether it fits or not. It's distracting when there are real issues people want to discuss.

quote:
It's always interesting when people talk about leaving problems for their children and grandchildren. That concerns you, Ron? Then I wonder how much it concerns you that Obama's spending has saddled our children and grandchildren with a debt practically impossible to handle? If you want to look for ways our children/grandchildren are being put in jeopardy, look there. I've seen you express no concern over that.

LOL. I rest my case, Mike. One has nothing to do with the other. Unless you also want to talk about deteriorating education, increased crime, and a substantially higher rate of stress in our returning war veterans? Those all affect our kids, too, after all. They are not, however, inter-related. And, heaven forbid, they're not all caused by Obama either.

There are good reasons why I haven't expressed my concerns over the national debt, Mike. But I shouldn't have to explain those reasons in a thread about oil.

quote:
You make me wonder where you have been during the two Bush terms.

Trust me, Mike, if you had been as relentless against Bush as you have been against Obama, I suspect I would have said something then, too.

quote:
By calling me on my bias you are simply illustrating your own.

No, Mike, because I would say the same thing if a Democrat brought up the Stimulus Package in a positive role instead of a negative one. It has nothing to do with this topic. I, for one, was all for creating jobs while rebuilding the infrastructure of America, both when Bush did and later when Obama did, but that doesn't have anything to do with creating jobs that harm our country rather than help it. Your quest for inconsistencies is misplaced, an apples and oranges thing, and hey that's okay. More to the point, though, it's distracting. It would be really nice to talk about issues again without you or Denise always carping on the last ten things President Obama did. Let's at least stick to one bad thing he did per thread, okay?


 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Oil well, well, well....   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors