Author Topic: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>  (Read 4993 times)

Offline Elfie

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6142
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #45 on: July 14, 2008, 11:24:26 PM »
So why wasn't anything done when the republicans ran everything?

For the same reason the democrats won't do anything. Both parties are to blame. Both the Legislative and Executive branches of our government are to blame. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are currently *broken*. We need a new, viable, third party that will actually put the interests of America first because the current two parties sure aren't getting it done.
Corkyjr on country jumping:
In the end you should be thankful for those players like us who switch to try and help keep things even because our willingness to do so, helps a more selfish, I want it my way player, get to fly his latewar uber ride.

Offline BnZ

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #46 on: July 15, 2008, 12:03:18 AM »
For the same reason the democrats won't do anything. Both parties are to blame. Both the Legislative and Executive branches of our government are to blame. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are currently *broken*. We need a new, viable, third party that will actually put the interests of America first because the current two parties sure aren't getting it done.

You are mistaken, Sir. People are working under a false premise, that their political parties are designed to do XYZ good thing for the nation, and then are shocked when they invariably do nothing or just the opposite.

The RepubloCrat/Demopublican party that controls this country is working perfectly to design parameters and is doing everything it is supposed to do. For instance, in the matter of assuring that third parties never become viable, it has a near perfect record.

Offline Elfie

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6142
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #47 on: July 15, 2008, 12:19:49 AM »
Quote
People are working under a false premise, that their political parties are designed to do XYZ good thing for the nation,

That was the intent of our founding fathers. That our elected officials should do what is best for the country and not what is best for themselves and their campaign contributors. I for one, still believe in the intent of our founding fathers.
Corkyjr on country jumping:
In the end you should be thankful for those players like us who switch to try and help keep things even because our willingness to do so, helps a more selfish, I want it my way player, get to fly his latewar uber ride.

Offline CAP1

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22287
      • The Axis Vs Allies Arena
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #48 on: July 15, 2008, 08:05:26 AM »
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080714/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

I like this move. I think it puts the stink eye on the incompetent Congress. Now, the real question; will the Congress lift their ban? Will it work?

:aok

this could be good.

but why in gods name does everyone believ that our prices will drop???????? they WON'T.

look at almost enything tht has gotten more expensive. when things ease up, they'll drop a few cents, but that's all. gas will never again go below $3.00 a gallon. hell...it'll never go back down to $3.50. ever. the oil companies know we'll pay this price for it, so why should they lower their prices? look how it is now......in my aea, it got up to $4.12/gallon. tht was only for a day or 2, and it was weeks ago. it then dropped to $3.85 or so. now people come in to my shop telling me how cheap they got their gas, when they paid over a dollar MORE than just 1 year ago.

 
ingame 1LTCAP
80th FS "Headhunters"
S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning in a Bottle)

Offline CAP1

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22287
      • The Axis Vs Allies Arena
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #49 on: July 15, 2008, 08:07:28 AM »
Of course it wont work. The Democrats in congress will say it's bad for the enviroment, Bush only did it because him and all his oil buddies stand to make a bunch of money, blah blah blah.

Never mind the fact that if it was lifted the speculators would HAVE to take into account ALL the new production, and availability when those fields come online, and have to reduce their prices because, hey we now have a ton of oil and we don't have to spend a fortune to ship it. The reduced price would benifit everyone in this country but then the government wouldn't be able to control the sheep like they want too, so they will never pass it.

it doesn't matter, democrat or republican. all he's doing is political posturing.

 here in the PRNJ, they're already trying to ban offshore drilling all the way down to VA. they say it "might" hurt the envirenment.
ingame 1LTCAP
80th FS "Headhunters"
S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning in a Bottle)

Offline CAP1

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22287
      • The Axis Vs Allies Arena
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #50 on: July 15, 2008, 08:09:01 AM »
Wherever you got that info is dead wrong. Here is a map of rigs and platforms damaged by Katrina.

(Image removed from quote.)

Here is the source for the map http://gom.rigzone.com/katrina.asp.  

funny, i had heard only 1 or 2 rigs were damaged to the point of affecting their capacity?
ingame 1LTCAP
80th FS "Headhunters"
S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning in a Bottle)

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #51 on: July 15, 2008, 08:17:49 AM »
That was the intent of our founding fathers. That our elected officials should do what is best for the country and not what is best for themselves and their campaign contributors. I for one, still believe in the intent of our founding fathers.

 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

If you really think the founding fathers made all this for US, then you really need to hit the history books again.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #52 on: July 15, 2008, 08:41:39 AM »
no matter who is at fault or what their reasons were 15 years ago.. things have changed and we now really do need to drill for our own oil and build some nuclear power plants.

We can let private industry continue to try to find a cheap and effective substitute for oil and we can have our toy windfarm and solar farm projects but we need to do some real work on getting more or our own oil and using less by not burning it or natural gas to make electricity.. we need nukes.

can anyone tell me what the price of oil the arabs are charging changed from 4 years ago till now?

lazs

Offline CHECKERS

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1187
      • http://www.geocities.com/motorcity/1502/index.html
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #53 on: July 15, 2008, 08:43:54 AM »
Soooooooo... It was a Presidential ban? So the Repundits harping on the libs keeping us from drilling were all... wet?

Say it ain't so!

Start Drilling and refining Oil and Gas on & off our shores, by Exective Order Now . ! May 21, 2008 Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee summoned top executives from the petroleum industry for what Chairman Pat Leahy thought would be a politically profitable inquisition. Leahy and his comrades showed up ready to blame American oil companies for the high price of gasoline, but the event wasn't as satisfactory as the Democrats had hoped. The industry lineup was formidable: . Robert Malone, Chairman and President of BP America, Inc.; . John Hofmeister, President, Shell Oil Company; . Peter Robertson, Vice Chairman of the Board, Chevron Corporation; . John Lowe, Executive Vice President, Conoco Philips Company; and . Stephen Simon, Senior Vice President, Exxon Mobil Corporation. Not surprisingly, the petroleum executives stole the show, as they were far smarter, infinitely better informed, and much more public-spirited than the Senate Democrats. One theme that emerged from the hearing was the surprisingly small role played by American oil companies in the global petroleum market. John Lowe pointed out: I cannot overemphasize the access issue. Access to resources is severely restricted in the United States and abroad, and the American oil industry must compete with national oil companies who are often much larger and have the support of their governments. We can only compete directly for 7 percent of the world's available reserves while about 75 percent is completely controlled by national oil companies and is not accessible. Stephen Simon amplified: Exxon Mobil is the largest U.S. oil and gas company, but we account for only 2 percent of global energy production, only 3 percent of global oil production, only 6 percent of global refining capacity, and only 1 percent of global petroleum reserves. With respect to petroleum reserves, we rank 14th. Government-owned national oil companies dominate the top spots. For an American company to succeed in this competitive landscape and go head to head with huge government-backed national oil companies, it needs financial strength and scale to execute massive complex energy projects requiring enormous long-term investments. To simply maintain our current operations and make needed capital investments, Exxon Mobil spends nearly $1 billion each day. Because foreign companies and governments control the overwhelming majority of the world's oil, most of the price you pay at the pump is the cost paid by the American oil company to acquire crude oil from someone else. Last year, the average price in the United States of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was around $2.80. On average in 2007, approximately 58 percent of the price reflected the amount paid for crude oil. Consumers pay for that crude oil, and so do we. Of the 2 million barrels per day Exxon Mobil refined in 2007 here in the United States , 90 percent were purchased from others. Another theme of the day's testimony was that, if anyone is 'gouging' consumers through the high price of gasoline, it is federal and state governments, not American oil companies. On the average, 15% percent of the cost of gasoline at the pump goes for taxes, while only 4% represents oil company profits. These figures were repeated several times, but, strangely, not a single Democratic Senator proposed relieving consumers' anxieties about gas prices by reducing taxes. The last theme that was sounded repeatedly was Congress's responsibility for the fact that American companies have access to so little petroleum. Shell's John Hofmeister explained, eloquently: While all oil-importing nations buy oil at global prices, some, notably India and China , subsidize the cost of oil products to their nation's consumers, feeding the demand for more oil despite record prices. They do this to speed economic growth and to ensure a competitive advantage relative to other nations. Meanwhile, in the United States , access to our own oil and gas resources has been limited for the last 30 years, prohibiting companies such as Shell from exploring and developing resources for the benefit of the American people. Senator Sessions, I agree, it is not a free market. According to the Department of the Interior, 62 percent of all on-shore federal lands are off limits to oil and gas developments, with restrictions applying to 92 percent of all federal lands. We have an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Atlantic Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Pacific Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the eastern Gulf of Mexico, congressional bans on on-shore oil and gas activities in specific areas of the Rockies and Alaska, and even a congressional ban on doing an analysis of the resource potential for oil and gas in the Atlantic, Pacific and eastern Gulf of Mexico. The Argonne National Laboratory did a report in 2004 that identified 40 specific federal policy areas that halt, limit, delay or restrict natural gas projects. I urge you to review it. It is a long list. If I may, I offer it today if you would like to include it in the record. When many of these policies were implemented, oil was selling in the single digits, not the triple digits we see now. The cumulative effect of these policies has been to discourage U.S. investment and send U.S. companies outside the United States to produce new supplies. As a result, U.S. production has declined so much that nearly 60 percent of daily consumption comes from foreign sources. The problem of access can be solved in this country by the same government that has prohibited it. Congress could have chosen to lift some or all of the current restrictions on exploration and production of oil and gas. Congress could provide national policy to reverse the persistent decline of domestically secure natural resource development. Later in the hearing, Senator Orrin Hatch walked Hofmeister through the Democrats' latest efforts to block energy independence: HATCH: I want to get into that. In other words, we're talking about Utah , Colorado and Wyoming . It's fair to say that they're not considered part of America 's $22 billion of proven reserves. HOFMEISTER: Not at all. HATCH: No, but experts agree that there's between 800 billion to almost 2 trillion barrels of oil that could be recoverable there, and that's good oil, isn't it? HOFMEISTER: That's correct. HATCH: It could be recovered at somewhere between $30 and $40 a barrel? HOFMEISTER: I think those costs are probably a bit dated now, based upon what we've seen in the inflation... HATCH: Well, somewhere in that area. HOFMEISTER: I don't know what the exact cost would be, but, you know, if there is more supply, I think inflation in the oil industry would be cracked. And we are facing severe inflation because of the limited amount of supply against the demand. HATCH: I guess what I'm saying, though, is that if we started to develop the oil shale in those three states we could do it within this framework of over $100 a barrel and make a profit. HOFMEISTER: I believe we could. HATCH: And we could help our country alleviate its oil pressures. HOFMEISTER: Yes. HATCH: But they're stopping us from doing that right here, as we sit here. We just had a hearing last week where Democrats had stopped the ability to do that, in at least Colorado . HOFMEISTER: Well, as I said in my opening statement, I think the public policy constraints on the supply side in this country are a disservice to the American consumer. The committee's Democrats attempted no response. They know that they are largely responsible for the current high price of gasoline, and they want the price to rise even further. Consequently, they have no intention of permitting the development of domestic oil and gas reserves that would both increase this country's energy independence and give consumers a break from constantly increasing energy costs. Every once in a while, Congressional hearings turn out to be informative. You be the judge as to why our gasoline prices are high. ===========================================
  Like most problems in this country,
 People the likes of Nancy Pelosi & the rest of Sierra Club puppets in the government,
  is not the solution,
 ............it is the problem!!
Originally posted by Panman
God the BK's are some some ugly mo-fo's. Please no more pictures, I'm going blind Bet your mothers don't even love ya cause u'all sooooooooo F******* ulgy.

Offline indy007

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3294
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #54 on: July 15, 2008, 09:08:22 AM »
The survey was done in 1998.

Link it pls!

Offline crockett

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3420
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #55 on: July 15, 2008, 11:20:39 AM »
Why you have not heard those things is because your head has been in the sand.

1.  Bush and the republicans TRIED 7 years ago to open up ANWR.  THey had a majority but everytime a vote would go to the floor or it would try and leave committee the dems filibustered it.
2.  Bush has said TIME AND TIME again that the key to energy independence is NOT things like kyoto treaty and new limits on green house gasses that will KILL our economy but the investment in new technologies.

Yes he saying we need to be energy independent yet what has he done? Again I ask you why was it he helped get wind farms in Texas but he wont push for more nation wide? Or solar power?

Energy independent is just a catchy phrase for blundered speeches which pretty much means nothing more than drilling for oil to produce maybe 5% of our needs on a good day. The American people came behind FDR during WW2 because he was a leader. Bush has failed to lead this country. He could have done what ever was needed to make us energy independent after 9/11 and the country would have supported him.. If he were a leader.

Instead he's nothing more than a puppet..
"strafing"

Offline crockett

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3420
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #56 on: July 15, 2008, 11:25:46 AM »
Start Drilling and refining Oil and Gas on & off our shores, by Exective Order Now . ! May 21, 2008 Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee summoned top executives from the petroleum industry for what Chairman Pat Leahy thought would be a politically profitable inquisition. Leahy and his comrades showed up ready to blame American oil companies for the high price of gasoline, but the event wasn't as satisfactory as the Democrats had hoped. The industry lineup was formidable: . Robert Malone, Chairman and President of BP America, Inc.; . John Hofmeister, President, Shell Oil Company; . Peter Robertson, Vice Chairman of the Board, Chevron Corporation; . John Lowe, Executive Vice President, Conoco Philips Company; and . Stephen Simon, Senior Vice President, Exxon Mobil Corporation. Not surprisingly, the petroleum executives stole the show, as they were far smarter, infinitely better informed, and much more public-spirited than the Senate Democrats. One theme that emerged from the hearing was the surprisingly small role played by American oil companies in the global petroleum market. John Lowe pointed out: I cannot overemphasize the access issue. Access to resources is severely restricted in the United States and abroad, and the American oil industry must compete with national oil companies who are often much larger and have the support of their governments. We can only compete directly for 7 percent of the world's available reserves while about 75 percent is completely controlled by national oil companies and is not accessible. Stephen Simon amplified: Exxon Mobil is the largest U.S. oil and gas company, but we account for only 2 percent of global energy production, only 3 percent of global oil production, only 6 percent of global refining capacity, and only 1 percent of global petroleum reserves. With respect to petroleum reserves, we rank 14th. Government-owned national oil companies dominate the top spots. For an American company to succeed in this competitive landscape and go head to head with huge government-backed national oil companies, it needs financial strength and scale to execute massive complex energy projects requiring enormous long-term investments. To simply maintain our current operations and make needed capital investments, Exxon Mobil spends nearly $1 billion each day. Because foreign companies and governments control the overwhelming majority of the world's oil, most of the price you pay at the pump is the cost paid by the American oil company to acquire crude oil from someone else. Last year, the average price in the United States of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was around $2.80. On average in 2007, approximately 58 percent of the price reflected the amount paid for crude oil. Consumers pay for that crude oil, and so do we. Of the 2 million barrels per day Exxon Mobil refined in 2007 here in the United States , 90 percent were purchased from others. Another theme of the day's testimony was that, if anyone is 'gouging' consumers through the high price of gasoline, it is federal and state governments, not American oil companies. On the average, 15% percent of the cost of gasoline at the pump goes for taxes, while only 4% represents oil company profits. These figures were repeated several times, but, strangely, not a single Democratic Senator proposed relieving consumers' anxieties about gas prices by reducing taxes. The last theme that was sounded repeatedly was Congress's responsibility for the fact that American companies have access to so little petroleum. Shell's John Hofmeister explained, eloquently: While all oil-importing nations buy oil at global prices, some, notably India and China , subsidize the cost of oil products to their nation's consumers, feeding the demand for more oil despite record prices. They do this to speed economic growth and to ensure a competitive advantage relative to other nations. Meanwhile, in the United States , access to our own oil and gas resources has been limited for the last 30 years, prohibiting companies such as Shell from exploring and developing resources for the benefit of the American people. Senator Sessions, I agree, it is not a free market. According to the Department of the Interior, 62 percent of all on-shore federal lands are off limits to oil and gas developments, with restrictions applying to 92 percent of all federal lands. We have an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Atlantic Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Pacific Ocean, an outer continental shelf moratorium on the eastern Gulf of Mexico, congressional bans on on-shore oil and gas activities in specific areas of the Rockies and Alaska, and even a congressional ban on doing an analysis of the resource potential for oil and gas in the Atlantic, Pacific and eastern Gulf of Mexico. The Argonne National Laboratory did a report in 2004 that identified 40 specific federal policy areas that halt, limit, delay or restrict natural gas projects. I urge you to review it. It is a long list. If I may, I offer it today if you would like to include it in the record. When many of these policies were implemented, oil was selling in the single digits, not the triple digits we see now. The cumulative effect of these policies has been to discourage U.S. investment and send U.S. companies outside the United States to produce new supplies. As a result, U.S. production has declined so much that nearly 60 percent of daily consumption comes from foreign sources. The problem of access can be solved in this country by the same government that has prohibited it. Congress could have chosen to lift some or all of the current restrictions on exploration and production of oil and gas. Congress could provide national policy to reverse the persistent decline of domestically secure natural resource development. Later in the hearing, Senator Orrin Hatch walked Hofmeister through the Democrats' latest efforts to block energy independence: HATCH: I want to get into that. In other words, we're talking about Utah , Colorado and Wyoming . It's fair to say that they're not considered part of America 's $22 billion of proven reserves. HOFMEISTER: Not at all. HATCH: No, but experts agree that there's between 800 billion to almost 2 trillion barrels of oil that could be recoverable there, and that's good oil, isn't it? HOFMEISTER: That's correct. HATCH: It could be recovered at somewhere between $30 and $40 a barrel? HOFMEISTER: I think those costs are probably a bit dated now, based upon what we've seen in the inflation... HATCH: Well, somewhere in that area. HOFMEISTER: I don't know what the exact cost would be, but, you know, if there is more supply, I think inflation in the oil industry would be cracked. And we are facing severe inflation because of the limited amount of supply against the demand. HATCH: I guess what I'm saying, though, is that if we started to develop the oil shale in those three states we could do it within this framework of over $100 a barrel and make a profit. HOFMEISTER: I believe we could. HATCH: And we could help our country alleviate its oil pressures. HOFMEISTER: Yes. HATCH: But they're stopping us from doing that right here, as we sit here. We just had a hearing last week where Democrats had stopped the ability to do that, in at least Colorado . HOFMEISTER: Well, as I said in my opening statement, I think the public policy constraints on the supply side in this country are a disservice to the American consumer. The committee's Democrats attempted no response. They know that they are largely responsible for the current high price of gasoline, and they want the price to rise even further. Consequently, they have no intention of permitting the development of domestic oil and gas reserves that would both increase this country's energy independence and give consumers a break from constantly increasing energy costs. Every once in a while, Congressional hearings turn out to be informative. You be the judge as to why our gasoline prices are high. ===========================================
  Like most problems in this country,
 People the likes of Nancy Pelosi & the rest of Sierra Club puppets in the government,
  is not the solution,
 ............it is the problem!!

Holy Molly paragraphs please..
"strafing"

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #57 on: July 15, 2008, 11:30:10 AM »
after bush made the announcement the price of a barrel of oil dropped $10.

and the democrats say more drilling will not reduce the price of oil.  :lol


Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #58 on: July 15, 2008, 11:49:40 AM »
the thing that really REALLY PISSES ME OFF about the democrats whenever they talk about drilling offshore is "well, that wont help for ten years" and Im thinking if we are having a problem now we are going to have a HELL OF A PROBLEM in ten years.

What the hell is it with these assanine liberal democrats?
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
Re: The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>
« Reply #59 on: July 15, 2008, 11:51:15 AM »
Quote
Link it pls!

The EIA report is at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/pdf/sroiaf(2008)03.pdf

The USGS report it's based on: http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/OF98-34/