Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Kowtowing to the Saudis, the thug Hugo Chavez, and Hollywood starlets, Obama has reneged on a major campaign promise, and we're paying through the nose.

[youtube][/youtube]

An interesting video.

Even our loyal Canadian friends will leave the US behind if we continue to give them the middle finger and embrace our enemies as Obama does.

The Canadians have picked up on the phony excuses that Obama used to block the Keystone pipeline and not have to switch from importing middle eastern and Venezuelan oil and switch to Canadian oil, because he doesn't want to cut off his friends in Venezuela and the middle east that are America's enemies.

In the US a huge number of people still seem to think this is about environmental responsibility, and not about raising money from Hollywood for Obama or continuing to support America's enemies financially by buying oil from them rather than from Canada.

LeadBolt wrote:An interesting video.

Even our loyal Canadian friends will leave the US behind if we continue to give them the middle finger and embrace our enemies as Obama does.

The Canadians have picked up on the phony excuses that Obama used to block the Keystone pipeline and not have to switch from importing middle eastern and Venezuelan oil and switch to Canadian oil, because he doesn't want to cut off his friends in Venezuela and the middle east that are America's enemies.

In the US a huge number of people still seem to think this is about environmental responsibility, and not about raising money from Hollywood for Obama or continuing to support America's enemies financially by buying oil from them rather than from Canada.

Protect Nebraska!!!!

Don't forget Barry's buddy Warren Buffet is going to make a ton of money off the Keystone decision. Warren's BNSF railroad will be moving all of that oil now instead.

HI54UNI wrote:Don't forget Barry's buddy Warren Buffet is going to make a ton of money off the Keystone decision. Warren's BNSF railroad will be moving all of that oil now instead.

Is that not the American way? Is Barry stepping in front of him?

Cap'n Cat wrote:

LeadBolt wrote:An interesting video.

Even our loyal Canadian friends will leave the US behind if we continue to give them the middle finger and embrace our enemies as Obama does.

The Canadians have picked up on the phony excuses that Obama used to block the Keystone pipeline and not have to switch from importing middle eastern and Venezuelan oil and switch to Canadian oil, because he doesn't want to cut off his friends in Venezuela and the middle east that are America's enemies.

In the US a huge number of people still seem to think this is about environmental responsibility, and not about raising money from Hollywood for Obama or continuing to support America's enemies financially by buying oil from them rather than from Canada.

Protect Nebraska!!!!

I'd Have no problem if this was about protecting Nebraska. It is about protecting the cash flow to Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, et al in their continuing efforts to funnel cash to those who are trying to undermine the USA.

Great, a canadian Sean Hannity.

How much of the Keyston oil would stay in the U.S.?

Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) offered an amendment to the bill during the Feb. 15 vote, giving the House a chance to “ensure that if the Keystone XL pipeline is built, the oil that it transports to the Gulf of Mexico and the fuels made from that oil remain in this country to benefit Americans.” But the amendment failed 173-254.
Not surprisingly, the 254 members who voted against the amendment have collected seven times more total campaign cash from oil and gas interests. The 254 members (230 Republicans) took in $37.3 million in career campaign contributions from oil and gas companies and executives.
On average, each member who voted against banning exports collected $146,808 from the oil and gas industry. This is contrasted with the $5.2 million total for the 173 in favor (9 Republicans) of the export ban – or an average of $29,951. In other words, legislators who want to export refined gasoline and diesel from oil sands received five times more oil money than the legislators who want to keep these fuels here.

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/02/ ... ?mobile=nc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cap'n Cat wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:Don't forget Barry's buddy Warren Buffet is going to make a ton of money off the Keystone decision. Warren's BNSF railroad will be moving all of that oil now instead.

Is that not the American way? Is Barry stepping in front of him?

It would be nice if Barry stepped in front of one of Warren's trains.

CitadelGrad wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Is that not the American way? Is Barry stepping in front of him?

It would be nice if Barry stepped in front of one of Warren's trains.

CitadelGrad wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Is that not the American way? Is Barry stepping in front of him?

It would be nice if Barry stepped in front of one of Warren's trains.

How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Whoa. This sort of common sense sure didn't stop the Dems from parading big oil execs in front of them for a grilling about profits, now did it?

SeattleGriz wrote:

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Whoa. This sort of common sense sure didn't stop the Dems from parading big oil execs in front of them for a grilling about profits, now did it?

They shoulda been shot, Stalin style.

SeattleGriz wrote:

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Whoa. This sort of common sense sure didn't stop the Dems from parading big oil execs in front of them for a grilling about profits, now did it?

And Big Oil is part of the speculation

people can rail on coal, oil, etc. Bottom line boys, it's the best we have and it WORKS. There is not ONE good reason why we should not be able to drill here. Saudis are the REAL terrorists in the world boys. And we have funded their damn empire for waaaaaaaay too long!!!

catamount man wrote:people can rail on coal, oil, etc. Bottom line boys, it's the best we have and it WORKS and it's going run out sooner than we need. There is not ONE good reason why we should not be able to drill here. Saudis are the REAL terrorists in the world boys. And we have funded their damn empire for waaaaaaaay too long!!!

FIFY

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Pure ignorance.

In July 2008, Bush lifted the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The price of oil went from an all time record high of $147 a barrel all the way down to $33 a barrel in January of 2009. Six fucking months...

Just the threat of the US daring to develop and utilize our own VAST reserves of crude oil products would AGAIN cause the world oil markets to flip upside down.

Why do you hate America, Jon?
Why do you want the middle class to pay $6.00 a gallon for gas?

Cap'n Cat wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
Whoa. This sort of common sense sure didn't stop the Dems from parading big oil execs in front of them for a grilling about profits, now did it?

They shoulda been shot, Stalin style.

If you are talking about the Dems, we finally agree on something! Hell, shoot em both.

Baldy wrote:

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Pure ignorance.

In July 2008, Bush lifted the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The price of oil went from an all time record high of $147 a barrel all the way down to $33 a barrel in January of 2009. Six fucking months...

Just the threat of the US daring to develop and utilize our own VAST reserves of crude oil products would AGAIN cause the world oil markets to flip upside down.

Why do you hate America, Jon?
Why do you want the middle class to pay $6.00 a gallon for gas?

Come on now Baldy, supply has never affected the price of anything.

Baldy wrote:

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Pure ignorance.

In July 2008, Bush lifted the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The price of oil went from an all time record high of $147 a barrel all the way down to $33 a barrel in January of 2009. Six **** months...

Just the threat of the US daring to develop and utilize our own VAST reserves of crude oil products would AGAIN cause the world oil markets to flip upside down.

Why do you hate America, Jon?
Why do you want the middle class to pay $6.00 a gallon for gas?

Ditto.
-Bush also lifted the Ban on drilling off of both coasts. Obama cam into office and reversed that.
-Obama has continued to block exploration in ANWR
-Obama blocked Keystone, after the Republicans put a deadline on it after 3 1/2 years of study (ie footdragging).

Oil prices are based not only on current supply and demand, but even more so on future supply and demand (the futures market). The libs like to claim that we have only 2% of the worlds oil reserves. That is baloney. We have 2% of the proven easily extractable oil reserves. That doesn't include probable or possible. Announce that were opening up exploration off of both coasts, ANWR, everywhere else where its off limits, building Keystone, etc, and the price would immediately drop, even though it would take years to get much of it to market.

Baldy wrote:

dbackjon wrote:How dumb can you be?

Keystone, built or not, will have ZERO to do with gas prices in the US.

Gas prices have little to do with supply, and are mostly due to unregulated speculation - the same type of speculation that cost you hundreds if not thousands of dollars during the Enron days.

But go ahead, SH - you are only help support those that are sucking the life out of the US.

Pure ignorance.

In July 2008, Bush lifted the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The price of oil went from an all time record high of $147 a barrel all the way down to $33 a barrel in January of 2009. Six fucking months...

Just the threat of the US daring to develop and utilize our own VAST reserves of crude oil products would AGAIN cause the world oil markets to flip upside down.

Why do you hate America, Jon?
Why do you want the middle class to pay $6.00 a gallon for gas?

Patent Conk bullshit Ugly American gunboat bravado.

Regardless, it ain't the right thing to do. We (the industrialized world) are polluting the piss out of ourselves. Jon doesn't hate America. Short-sighted Conklodytes hate America by thinking in the short term only.

BDKJMU wrote:

Baldy wrote:
Pure ignorance.

In July 2008, Bush lifted the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. The price of oil went from an all time record high of $147 a barrel all the way down to $33 a barrel in January of 2009. Six **** months...

Just the threat of the US daring to develop and utilize our own VAST reserves of crude oil products would AGAIN cause the world oil markets to flip upside down.

Why do you hate America, Jon?
Why do you want the middle class to pay $6.00 a gallon for gas?

Ditto.
-Bush also lifted the Ban on drilling off of both coasts. Obama came into office and reversed that.
-Obama has continued to block exploration in ANWR
-Obama blocked Keystone, after the Republicans put a deadline on it after 3 1/2 years of study (ie footdragging).

Oil prices are based not only on current supply and demand, but even more so on future supply and demand (the futures market). The libs like to claim that we have only 2% of the worlds oil reserves. That is baloney. We have 2% of the proven easily extractable oil reserves. That doesn't include probable or possible. Announce that were opening up exploration off of both coasts, ANWR, everywhere else where its off limits, building Keystone, etc, and the price would immediately drop, even though it would take years to get much of it to market.

And how could I forget about
-Obama shutting down all deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico for a year and eastern Gulf drilling for 7 years (or however long he remmains in office
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-01/poli ... M:POLITICS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-Besides Obama reversing Bush's plan to sell leases off the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, he even rescinded leases already granted in Alaskan waters.
-"...The Obama administration recently rescinded 77 oil and gas leases in Utah and stalled oil shale research and development in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming, where the federal government owns most of the world's oil shale reserves...."
http://news.investors.com/Article.aspx? ... 9&ibdbot=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Conks.

kalm wrote:Conks.

.....""Today on federal land, the area where the president has control, production in the Gulf of Mexico is down 30 percent. Lease sales in Rocky Mountains on federal lands are down 70 percent," Jack Gerard, head of the American Petroleum Institute said.

He says the president has put 85 percent of the outer continental shelf off limits and overall, is only making 3 percent of the areas under his control available for development.

Numbers from think tanks and the federal Energy Information Administration confirm those numbers.......

....Exploration and development do take years. But analysts argue the administration can't now take credit for decisions about drilling made years ago by President Bush and his predecessors.

"That production is a direct result of leases issued before this administration and as result of development on private and state lands," Gerard said.

On private lands, oil production is booming. In North Dakota, the oil and gas are on private or state land and beyond the president's control.

The state has gone from producing a small amount of oil to some 450,000 barrels a day.

Unemployment is 3.3 percent, the lowest in the country. And the state has a budget surplus in the billions.

Gerard thinks North Dakota isn't the only place. He says if the President would unleash the energy industry, the US and Canada have so much oil and gas that, along with renewables, we could become energy independent."

"We could be energy self sufficient right here in North America in 12 years, but that takes political courage," he said.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and others are now talking about releasing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve.

Gerard says it at least shows the administration recognizes that supply affects prices. But he argues we have a bigger reserve right under our feet-- if we'd only develop it."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02 ... roduction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Donks.

BDKJMU wrote:

kalm wrote:Conks.

.....""Today on federal land, the area where the president has control, production in the Gulf of Mexico is down 30 percent. Lease sales in Rocky Mountains on federal lands are down 70 percent," Jack Gerard, head of the American Petroleum Institute said.

He says the president has put 85 percent of the outer continental shelf off limits and overall, is only making 3 percent of the areas under his control available for development.

Numbers from think tanks and the federal Energy Information Administration confirm those numbers.......

....Exploration and development do take years. But analysts argue the administration can't now take credit for decisions about drilling made years ago by President Bush and his predecessors.

"That production is a direct result of leases issued before this administration and as result of development on private and state lands," Gerard said.

On private lands, oil production is booming. In North Dakota, the oil and gas are on private or state land and beyond the president's control.

The state has gone from producing a small amount of oil to some 450,000 barrels a day.

Unemployment is 3.3 percent, the lowest in the country. And the state has a budget surplus in the billions.

Gerard thinks North Dakota isn't the only place. He says if the President would unleash the energy industry, the US and Canada have so much oil and gas that, along with renewables, we could become energy independent."

"We could be energy self sufficient right here in North America in 12 years, but that takes political courage," he said.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and others are now talking about releasing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve.

Gerard says it at least shows the administration recognizes that supply affects prices. But he argues we have a bigger reserve right under our feet-- if we'd only develop it."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02 ... roduction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Donks.

This makes sense but it's funny how economic policy under Bush is off the table. The permitting process slowed down quite a bit after the Gulf spill but is now picking back up.

Guess we'll have to wait until a couple of years into the Romney administration to see the production from these.

Conks...still

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The Obama administration proposed more oil drilling in Arctic waters Tuesday, planning two new leases in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas off Alaska's north coast.
The plan also offers new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in Alaska's Cook Inlet on the state's southern coast over the next five years, but keeps new drilling away from the east, west and Florida coasts.

The proposal, outlined by the Interior Department, seeks to strike a balance between energy production and environmental protection.
The proposal largely keeps to previous statements made by the administration on offshore drilling since the BP spill except in regard to the Arctic.
Although the administration has always indicated it would allow drilling in the Arctic, it had never offered leases to drill on the land it owns beneath the ocean's surface.
The Arctic leases won't be offered until 2014 or 2015, the Interior Department said, in an effort to give companies and the government time to adequately prepare for a spill and conduct further scientific study.
The news did not sit well with environmentalists, who say a spill in the cold Arctic waters would be nearly impossible to clean up and irreversibly damage the fragile ecosystem.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/08/news/ec ... /index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;