Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: strk on April 18, 2004, 09:31:44 PM
-
Bob Woodward - just a few minutes ago on 60 Minutes. Saudi Prince Bandar has direct line to the white house - and told Bush* that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy.
Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it.
Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?
-
If they were truely in cahoots why are oil prices so high now? It rather flys in the face of your position.
-
The prices are up right now because the Saudis feel like being asses.
OPEC can make so much oil without breaking a sweat. They are cutting back to spite people.
-
Low oil prices are good for all Americans. Once again the dumbocrats find themselves hoping for bad things to happen to Americans, just so they can win elections.
-
It's because Strk* has a direct line to the white house - and knows exactly "that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy."
And despite that Strk* claims
"Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it. " he doesn't really have any proof of it does he?
And since Strk* is such a good friend of Colin Powell's and as such Strk* is worried about Colin Powell's welfare he states,
"Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?" despite that fact that Colin Powell is not only a grown man, extremely smart, a decorated veteran, but also not a poosy and able to take of himself.
Once again the liberal left wing-nuts 'there is a vast right-wing conspiracy' have place a spin on current events. Strk*, I don't like your politics and neither do I like your negative ad campaign.
How about posting some links to your information or put a tin foil hat on your head. You are sounding worse than Moulder.
[Edit]
I have to agree with Funked. Looks like certain sides are looking for something to win an election with. How many times can somone cry wolf about a person? If all these things were absolutely true then Bush would be worse than Stalin, Hitler, and Satan all in one. At least Hillary has stopped spouting her anti-GOP diatribe. The funny thing is that all those bad things that most people have condemned Bush for in the past...have been conveniently forgotten for more bad things that he's supposedly done.
I don't really think that Bush is the greatest thing to have happen since sliced bread but the way people attack him just screams of borderline hate. Hate, for the simple fact that he is there. I personally didn't like Clinton but I didn't attack him for perceived wrong-doings. I simply commented (not unsubstantiatedly claimed) on his wrong-doings.
I realize this won't change those who percieve Bush to be evil...but I do hope it makes you think that just possible you are being slightly stupid and sheep-like.
[/edit]
-
It's quite amazing how people are more enraged with a certain country defining prices of goods, which they have produced, from resources that came within their borders, than a very alarming accusation which the government elected by the people are effectively accused of being in cahoots with a foreign country.
Shouldn't you guys be mad about the latter than the former?
Instead, you guys seem to be mad about the first part, and fall deaf years on the second part.
:confused:
Weird..
-
hey dont forget....when it comes to the economy John Kerry is AGAINST higher gass prices.....unless he's talking to environmentalists....than he's FOR higher gass prices....unless he's talking to democrats....than he's FOR tax increases on gasses....unless he's talking to trucker unions and cap drivers than he's AGAINST higher gass prices.
BUT one thing is for sure....he was FOR higher gass prices befor he was AGAINST them....until he's FOR them again.:lol
-
The solution - Nationalize all oil industry in the United States...we'd instantly see about a quarter off gas prices.
-
Yeah, because communism really works..
-
Originally posted by strk
Bob Woodward - just a few minutes ago on 60 Minutes. Saudi Prince Bandar has direct line to the white house - and told Bush* that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy.
Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it.
Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?
Just cause ause bob woodward says so its true?
If thats the case I'd like to see the Gov investigate just how he gets all his info. Whats he got the Whitehouse bugged or something?
Either that or someone needs to be brought up on charges of treason and stood up in front of a firing squad.
I hope oil proces do go down for the election. I couldnt care less the reason so long as they go down.
As Bush telling the Saudies about Iraq all I can say is.."so?"
And Remember Powel works for the President, not the other way around.
The President doesnt have to tell him a damn thing before he tells someone else.
-
oh and BTW we get less then 10% of our oil from the middle east.
Most of it we get from Mexico and south america.
Tell me those countries promised to lower prices and I'll really be impressed LOL
-
Originally posted by Drunky
It's because Strk* has a direct line to the white house - and knows exactly "that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy."
And despite that Strk* claims
"Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it. " he doesn't really have any proof of it does he?
And since Strk* is such a good friend of Colin Powell's and as such Strk* is worried about Colin Powell's welfare he states,
"Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?" despite that fact that Colin Powell is not only a grown man, extremely smart, a decorated veteran, but also not a poosy and able to take of himself.
Once again the liberal left wing-nuts 'there is a vast right-wing conspiracy' have place a spin on current events. Strk*, I don't like your politics and neither do I like your negative ad campaign.
How about posting some links to your information or put a tin foil hat on your head. You are sounding worse than Moulder.
[Edit]
I have to agree with Funked. Looks like certain sides are looking for something to win an election with. How many times can somone cry wolf about a person? If all these things were absolutely true then Bush would be worse than Stalin, Hitler, and Satan all in one. At least Hillary has stopped spouting her anti-GOP diatribe. The funny thing is that all those bad things that most people have condemned Bush for in the past...have been conveniently forgotten for more bad things that he's supposedly done.
I don't really think that Bush is the greatest thing to have happen since sliced bread but the way people attack him just screams of borderline hate. Hate, for the simple fact that he is there. I personally didn't like Clinton but I didn't attack him for perceived wrong-doings. I simply commented (not unsubstantiatedly claimed) on his wrong-doings.
I realize this won't change those who percieve Bush to be evil...but I do hope it makes you think that just possible you are being slightly stupid and sheep-like.
[/edit]
Boy, for someone who asked for rational debte you resort to ad hominem attacks right off the bat?
I didnt say it, genius. Bob Woodward did on 60 minutes
-
I guess drilling for our own is out of the question?
what does it matter to OPEC who is POTUS? They have him by the balls whoever it is ...
newsflash
Mr Woodward is SELLING HIS BOOK! just like the other tards being paraded in front of the cameras like experts .. election year is so fun.
LANDSLIDE BUSH!
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
oh and BTW we get less then 10% of our oil from the middle east.
Most of it we get from Mexico and south america.
Tell me those countries promised to lower prices and I'll really be impressed LOL
Thus speaks a tardling with no idea how *any* global market works :rolleyes:
-
Strk
Sort of off topic but why do you always write Bush as Bush*?
-
Originally posted by Momus--
Thus speaks a tardling with no idea how *any* global market works :rolleyes:
For Drunky - so you wont confuse me with Bob Woodward again
quote from cbs news
"Prince Bandar enjoys easy access to the Oval Office. His family and the Bush family are close. And Woodward told 60 Minutes that Bandar has promised the president that Saudi Arabia will lower oil prices in the months before the election - to ensure the U.S. economy is strong on election day."
Link - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/15/60minutes/main612067.shtml
So far all I have heard is typical Bush*co response
1. deny deny deny
2. attack the messenger
3. attack the whistleblower
For the gentleman who thinks that he is just trying to sell a book (part of the deny deny crowd) - if your assumption is correct then we should expect Mr Woodward to be slapped with a civil suit for Libel and Slander, and an injunction halting the sales of the book.
BTW my post did not even mention the mis-appropriation of funds to lay the framework and planning for Iraq. Congress had appropriated that money for Afghanistan, Bush*co used it for Iraq. Such action is forbidden by the Constitution (no money from the treasury unless appropriated).
Sounds like a "high crime or misdemeanor" to me. Time to start impeachment proceedings. What did they say during the Clinton impeachment - No one is above the law
So I expect all of you who rallied in defense of the sanctity and honor of our highest office and supported the impeachment last time around to write your representative and demand articles of impeachment immediately.
-
Someone explained the Libel / Slander thing really easily to me.
No matter if you sue, win or lose, the writing will get more press and more attention. Some people are actually stupid enough to believe it, even when it's under contention.
So what have you accomplished? You might be a few million up right now, but your credibility is down and people will remember what was said.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
I guess drilling for our own is out of the question?
We've already been though this. We cant take oil from the Mid East and we cant drill in Alaska because the reindeer would get pissy.
We need to find alternative fuels like... hemp oil and hair grease.
(http://www.jaysfancydresshire.co.uk/Hippy%20z.jpg)
-
So, we've known for quite some time now that 60 minutes is an info-mercial for authors who's book need marketing....
-
Originally posted by AdmRose
The solution - Nationalize all oil industry in the United States...we'd instantly see about a quarter off gas prices.
You do realize that the government, through taxes, makes more on a gallon of gas then the dealer, don't you?
-
Originally posted by Stringer
You do realize that the government, through taxes, makes more on a gallon of gas then the dealer, don't you?
Just found this tidbit:
Example of a $1.97 gallon of gas in San Francisco:
76 cents for the crude.
59 cents to ship and refine it.
40 cents for federal and state taxes
11.4 cents in sales tax.
10 to 12 cents for the station owner to pay rent, salaries, utilities -- and earn a profit.
-
so Bush went to a hostile, bitter little liberal reporter and told him of the scheme... er conspiracy... to raise oil prices now and then lower em right before the election? and.....fortuitously.... he did all this just as the lttle whiny liberal was putting his book out?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so Bush went to a hostile, bitter little liberal reporter and told him of the scheme... er conspiracy... to raise oil prices now and then lower em right before the election? and.....fortuitously.... he did all this just as the lttle whiny liberal was putting his book out?
lazs
As a matter of fact... yes.
Bush was the only person in the book to allow himself to be quoted directly.
I watched the 60 Minutes report with my wife and oldest son. They both had a very different reaction. The impression they got was that GWB was attempting to lay blame for the Iraq War decision onto Tenet and Cheney. Tenet's "Slam Dunk" report on WMD to the President supposedly sealing the deal.
-
It almost makes me think people just spew a ton of bull**** hoping that some of it would be true.
The media and strk have been shown to be the true instruments of modern politics.
MiniD
-
some just have to go up to their wrist while others sink up to their elbows to read the braille
(http://www.nbp.org/alphcard120.jpg)
-
Yes, of course!! and woodward is such an unbiased and reliable source. naturally 60 minutes has no liberal agenda either. If it's in the any of the mainstream news sources i don't believe it and in fact will probably look to the exact opposite of what is being said as the truth. if it's on fox i'll take it with a grain of salt.
-
Originally posted by Momus--
Thus speaks a tardling with no idea how *any* global market works :rolleyes:
Hmmm the best you can do for a counterpoint is to resort to the tactics of a 5 year old and resort to namecalling.
Now theres a responce we can all take seriously:rolleyes:
And I'm the Tardling?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So, we've known for quite some time now that 60 minutes is an info-mercial for authors who's book need marketing....
Yeah, and the No-Spin Spin Master and Hannity and Colmes never plug their own stuff on the Rupert Channel.
Different side of the same coin, so call it straight.
-
The sooner we get the Middle East to pump all the oil they have,
the quicker we can watch them try to export sand.
-
well.... I guess I will just have to top off all my tanks on election day just before I go to the polls and vote for Bush then. thanks for the heads up.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so Bush went to a hostile, bitter little liberal reporter and told him of the scheme... er conspiracy... to raise oil prices now and then lower em right before the election? and.....fortuitously.... he did all this just as the lttle whiny liberal was putting his book out?
lazs
Oh, Laziepoo....Bob Woodward is a Republican, has been for quite a few years pre dating Nixon.
-
He's a RINO. if he's anything he's a liberal.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so Bush went to a hostile, bitter little liberal reporter and told him of the scheme... er conspiracy... to raise oil prices now and then lower em right before the election? and.....fortuitously.... he did all this just as the lttle whiny liberal was putting his book out?
lazs
Actually, Woodward has really good creds as a journalist. Also, he wrote a book that was very flattering to Bush* and the war.
He leans to the right IMO, and a damn good investigative journalist.
Plus - the book is made from TAPED interviews. He did big time CYA.
Of course, maybe the first book was a rope a dope set up.
Whatever - keeps Bush* feet in the fire
-
so much kneejerk stuff some guys should just setup sig files and spam the same stuff.
Woodward is a pro, different league than the rah-rah Left 60min guys. Very, very good at CYA, he seems to hold sources back until he can rope someone into engaging him on credibility.
The appropriation of the Afghan funds is interesting. The 9/11 commission is mostly ticky-tacky partison stuff but that is more of a heavy. Will be interesting to see what kinda legs it has cause its not as sexy as the 9/11 finger pointing. Should be some good debate from the Con Law guys at least.
-
Originally posted by strk
Bob Woodward - just a few minutes ago on 60 Minutes. Saudi Prince Bandar has direct line to the white house - and told Bush* that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy.
Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it.
Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?
Hey that's good news! Remember when Kerry was saying he'd lobby the Saudis to lower gas prices? I guess Bush beat him to it, WTG Bush!
Lower gas prices is a good thing, right? LOL, "busted on it" as if that's bad to have them lower oil prices.
-
Alot good that does in Nov, why can't they hold an election in peak season like July or Aug.
-
FWIW,
Woodward is on Larry King now, and Bandar just called in and they had a discussion. Bandar didn't deny the gas price thing. "Absolutely" was the word I think he used. But he says it's common for presidents to ask for lower prices.
And yeah, I'd go almost as far as to characterize Woodward as a staunch conservative. Not a "liberal" by any means. His last book about Bush was almost embarrassing in its gushing over him.
And no - he doesn't have the Whithouse bugged. Bush wanted this story to be written. Problem is, at the time, Bush thought the outcome of all of this would look a hell of a lot rosier than it's turning out to be.
-
Go to http://www.georgebush.com and hit the "suggested reading" link...
"Plan of Attack
by Bob Woodward"
That should silence the naysayers almost immediately. Hell, if yer leader likes it, in all likelyhood you will too. "Ditto!" :)
-
like i said RINO
-
Bush convinced the Saudis to lower gas prices, the world is coming to an end.
-
Yup, it's only bad if Bush said he'd like them lowered at a specific time, rather than "Right the shreck now, please".
Dunno - I haven't read the book.
-
On another note my wife is annoyed by your avatar Nash, wtg!
-
You got it, buddy!
:aok
(Gad, I love that damn thumbs up smiley...)
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
oh and BTW we get less then 10% of our oil from the middle east.
Most of it we get from Mexico and south america.
Tell me those countries promised to lower prices and I'll really be impressed LOL
Actually Canada is the biggest exporter of oil to the US.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
oh and BTW we get less then 10% of our oil from the middle east.
Most of it we get from Mexico and south america.
Tell me those countries promised to lower prices and I'll really be impressed LOL
According to the DoE, you get about a quarter of your oil from Arab OPEC.
-
I can understand folks not being upset if Bush was using gas prices to win an election. What I dont understand is how at the same time the dots cannot be connected on our glorious leader that he is just allowing Exxon/Mobile to rape the American peoples perhaps one last time..
If gas prices are found to be kept artifically high, what say you self proclaimed conservatives? You guys find that method of support to Bush and his 'folks' agreeable?
dude
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Hmmm the best you can do for a counterpoint is to resort to the tactics of a 5 year old and resort to namecalling.
Now theres a responce we can all take seriously:rolleyes:
And I'm the Tardling?
Your response was factually incorrect and doesn't take into account the fact that oil prices are set globally based on the market and not where your particular country happens to buy it's oil at the moment. The price set by OPEC affects the price set by the rest of the market.
Of course, if you knew what you were talking about, you wouldn't have posted your inane comment in the 1st place. Thus you are a tardling, or perhaps a poseur, I'm easy as to which.
-
in my book woodard is a liberal. A pretty oportunistic one at that.
I don't care who lowers gas prices but I won't vote for a democrat... like moving back in with your mom. apartment dwelling, prius driving women.
lazs
-
"The allegation that the kingdom is manipulating the price of oil for political purposes or to affect elections is erroneous and has no basis in fact," said a statement issued in Riyadh by top Saudi foreign policy adviser Adel al-Jubeir.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
"The allegation that the kingdom is manipulating the price of oil for political purposes or to affect elections is erroneous and has no basis in fact," said a statement issued in Riyadh by top Saudi foreign policy adviser Adel al-Jubeir.
Since we know that HIS statement is not factual, should we consider this person a liar?
We do know that (if not now) in the past oil prices have been manipulated for election purposes.. right?
Suppose my question is why the quote of this person? I guess im needing clarification..
dude
-
The quote is contemporary (breaking news april 20) and is taken for what it is worth.
And how do you know the Saudi is lying?
Seems as though the trial is not over and the jury has already voted.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
The quote is contemporary (breaking news april 20) and is taken for what it is worth.
And how do you know the Saudi is lying?
Seems as though the trial is not over and the jury has already voted.
I never said that he was lying.. (the reason I asked)
What does the quote mean to you?? Im not hiding anything.. Im really curious..
dude
-
All the quote means to me is that there is opposing information to the theory that a conspiracy exists to manipulate the election by lowering oil prices.
This needs to go on one side of the scale, the opposing theory on the other and see how the scale balances. I'm still loading up the scale, not ready for the measurement yet.
Although I generally tend to doubt worldwide conspriracy theories.
-
If you vote for someone because of the price of gasoline, you are an idiot.
-
Saudies are scumbag : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3643739.stm
-
TY Holden... 8)
dude
-
Originally posted by lazs2
in my book . . .
lazs
"Living with Herpes" - by Bill O'Reilly
-
I didn't write Mr Oreilly's book nor do I have herpes. don't even really know the guy.
I also don't pretend to know what is going on behind the scenes with major political powers.
Lower gas prices are good... I have heard lots of democrats saying that higher gas prices would be good for America but I have never heard a Republican say such a thing.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
a conspiracy exists to manipulate the election by lowering oil prices.
a few points
1. Woodward had unprecedented access to the White House and even interviewed Bush* himself.
2. Woodward was on Larry King last night and Saudi Prince Bandar called into the show and confirmed lower oil prices for the election - to make the economy appear strong.
3. Not all conspiracy theories incorrect. Law of averages shows that some must hit on the truth.
The truth is out there folks - the emperor has no clothes.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I didn't write Mr Oreilly's book nor do I have herpes. don't even really know the guy.
I also don't pretend to know what is going on behind the scenes with major political powers.
Lower gas prices are good... I have heard lots of democrats saying that higher gas prices would be good for America but I have never heard a Republican say such a thing.
lazs
Well friend, how about this -
""Let us rid ourselves of the fiction that low oil prices are somehow good for the United States," Mr. Cheney, who is now vice president, said shortly after introducing the legislation.
linkage - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/06/politics/06CHEN.html?ei=5007&en=7edcc32708d09716&ex=1396584000&adxnnl=1&partner=USERLAND&adxnnlx=1082499909-CpGVStzS9gr3fuaMJNHZGQ
Maybe you aren't paying close enough attention?
-
Originally posted by strk
3. Not all conspiracy theories incorrect. Law of averages shows that some must hit on the truth.
And you choose to believe this one over the obvious conspiracy that is shown by the 33rd parallel passing thru Baghdad, Dealey Plaza, Roswell and area 51, while the 33rd level is the highest level in the Freemasons?
Pretty naive...
>forgot an 'e' and a smiley...
-
Tin hats all around!
-
hmm.. strk...not exactly the same thing as raising prices on gas... What Cheny said was that when there is a glut of oil... the example being, when it was $24 a barrel and the arabs drop it to say $18 ... it harms domestic production.. it also never really is reflected in the price at the pump.
He proposed that the import oil be taxed (in this example) $6 to bring it to the current price so that the American oil bussiness (and exploration and industry) stayed viable. Artificially dropping prices long enough to put the American c0ompanies out of the game was what he was talking about as I understand it.
Net results would not be an increase in gas prices..
the democrats are looking at it from an environmental viewpoint like gore (inventer of the internet and half the couple love story was modeled after) who feels that $5 a gallon gas would rid us of the evil internal combustion engine much faster.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
And you choose to believe this one over the obvious conspiracy that is shown by the 33rd parallel passing thru Baghdad, Dealey Plaza, Roswell and area 51, while the 33rd level is the highest level in the Freemasons?
Pretty naive...
>forgot an 'e' and a smiley...
Im just saying that you cant dismiss them all out of hand.
As a freemason, I can honestly say that i have no idea what you are talking about. And by 33rd level I think you mean shriners, who drive small red cars, wear funny hats and drink too much. I dont worry too much about them.
And it isnt a conspiracy theory if the principal players (ala Prince Bendar) has acknowledged it on national tv. Well its not a THEORY anymore, at least.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
hmm.. strk...not exactly the same thing as raising prices on gas... What Cheny said was that when there is a glut of oil... the example being, when it was $24 a barrel and the arabs drop it to say $18 ... it harms domestic production.. it also never really is reflected in the price at the pump.
He proposed that the import oil be taxed (in this example) $6 to bring it to the current price so that the American oil bussiness (and exploration and industry) stayed viable. Artificially dropping prices long enough to put the American c0ompanies out of the game was what he was talking about as I understand it.
Net results would not be an increase in gas prices..
the democrats are looking at it from an environmental viewpoint like gore (inventer of the internet and half the couple love story was modeled after) who feels that $5 a gallon gas would rid us of the evil internal combustion engine much faster.
lazs
that doesnt figure because if oil was cheaper from overseas then we would buy that oil and not domestic oil. Gas prices WOULD go down because the cost of crude goes down.
Cheney's oil tax scheme was simple trade protection for american oil companies. The net result would have been higher fuel prices, which as we all know affects the price of EVERYTHING.
OTOH the Gore idea was that higher gas taxes, liek those in Europe would raise revenue for mass transit while forcing auto manufacturers to develop more efficient engines - like the hybrids you like to disdain today.
Let me ask you this - knowing that all a hybrid engine does is capture energy that would otherwise be lost, why doesn't it make sense? Shouldn't we try to conserve all things, and not waste anything?
-
KEEL ZEM! KEEL ZEM ALL UND BATHE EEN OIL!
Safety warning: Avoid smoking when doing so.
-
strk:
sorry 33rd degree, not level... just do a google on 33rd degree freemason and the truth will appear.
That you are a freemason explains a lot. Obviously you are trying to manipulate the thoughts of those of us who are not freemasons but we are on to you. Obviously, none of what you say can be trusted.
:)
(please read my sig)
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
strk:
sorry 33rd degree, not level... just do a google on 33rd degree freemason and the truth will appear.
That you are a freemason explains a lot. Obviously you are trying to manipulate the thoughts of those of us who are not freemasons but we are on to you. Obviously, none of what you say can be trusted.
:)
(please read my sig)
hehe. of course I must kill you now
seriously though the 33rd degree are the Shriners -the highest degree of freemasonry
-
I have never read the Illuminati trilogy nor do I know anything about what is being said in this thread. I am blissfully unaware of the ongoing control of the world from behind the scenes as the rest of us drones carry on with the day to day drudgery of our pitiful existance. Reality TV is the way of the future. McDonalds serves wholesome meals at competative prices. We are all in good hands .... with Allstate.
-
Originally posted by Arlo
I have never read the Illuminati trilogy nor do I know anything about what is being said in this thread. I am blissfully unaware of the ongoing control of the world from behind the scenes as the rest of us drones carry on with the day to day drudgery of our pitiful existance. Reality TV is the way of the future. McDonalds serves wholesome meals at competative prices. We are all in good hands .... with Allstate.
Arlo drank the Kool Aide!
-
yes... look at europe with its high gas prices... everyone is blissfully riding on mass transit (i hated it) and they are developing engines that run on bat turds for a penny a mile...
no.. give the government more money and they will spend it... most lilkely on some unfunded social program.
Cheny's plan, according to the article was protectionist but only to level out prices.
Why couldn't the $6 dollar a barrel (in the example) be used for these noble bat guano research projects?
No... it all boils down to... for us little guys... the democrats will raise the price of gas much faster than any republican ever will.
lazs
-
Its pretty evident everyone in this thread needs to study alittle history of gas prices and presidents asking other countries to lower prices.
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/oil/gasprices.chronology.html#a1999
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yes... look at europe with its high gas prices... everyone is blissfully riding on mass transit (i hated it) and they are developing engines that run on bat turds for a penny a mile...
no.. give the government more money and they will spend it... most lilkely on some unfunded social program.
Cheny's plan, according to the article was protectionist but only to level out prices.
Why couldn't the $6 dollar a barrel (in the example) be used for these noble bat guano research projects?
No... it all boils down to... for us little guys... the democrats will raise the price of gas much faster than any republican ever will.
lazs
That doesnt follow the facts because Cheney's plan would cause the price of oil to go form 16 to 24 per bbl. The costs of gas would have to go up. Should we be raising foreign prices to allow US companies to compete? I mean are we for free trade or arent we?
when gas prices rise, everthing gets more expensive because shipping costs increase
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Actually Canada is the biggest exporter of oil to the US.
Thats not correct.....it's not oil, but rather hot air and bull ****.
Carry on
-
Originally posted by strk
Bob Woodward - just a few minutes ago on 60 Minutes. Saudi Prince Bandar has direct line to the white house - and told Bush* that oil prices would be lowered in the months before the election to ensure a strong economy.
Once Bush* is elected, prices go right back up again? Are prices artificially high right now? EIther way the GOPers are flat busted on it.
Oh, and Bush* gave the Saudis top secret/no foreign intelligence and informed THEM that we were going into Iraq BEFORE Colin Powell knew about it. Why does Powell put up with that?
Israeli's are going to be pissed when they hear about this - they think they control the US not them damn stinking Saudi's!!!
-
A little surfing got these statistics for US national petroleum use as of 2002:
19.6MM barrels / day
46.6% imported
53.4% from United States
7.75% from Saudi Arabia
7.65% from Mexico
7.37% from Canada
6.13% from Venezuela
11.3% from Persian Gulf states
25.8% from non OPEC
-
Crude Oil Imports (Top 15 Countries)
(Thousand Barrels per Day)
Country Jan-04 Dec-03 YTD 2004 Jan-03 Jan - Dec 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANADA 1,626 1,663 1,626 1,621 1,547
MEXICO 1,594 1,765 1,594 1,566 1,589
SAUDI ARABIA 1,432 1,399 1,432 1,820 1,724
VENEZUELA 1,298 1,323 1,298 399 1,193
NIGERIA 923 938 923 798 838
IRAQ 578 678 578 600 470
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
A little surfing got these statistics for US national petroleum use as of 2002:
19.6MM barrels / day
46.6% imported
53.4% from United States
7.75% from Saudi Arabia
7.65% from Mexico
7.37% from Canada
6.13% from Venezuela
11.3% from Persian Gulf states
25.8% from non OPEC
I see what you are getting at but you are ignoring market forces. Once cheap saudi oil is available, do you think the ratios will remain the same?
-
I was just reporting the facts, as of 2002, Nash has some updates.
I came to no conclusion, and I suppose if cheap saudi crude was available, we would buy as much as we could up to the Saudi imposed production limit.
But it seems if we doubled imports from SA the effect would be largely buffered by the other 80% of the market.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I was just reporting the facts, as of 2002, Nash has some updates.
I came to no conclusion, and I suppose if cheap saudi crude was available, we would buy as much as we could up to the Saudi imposed production limit.
But it seems if we doubled imports from SA the effect would be largely buffered by the other 80% of the market.
right and that 20% would be enough to lower overall prices wouldn't it? And don't you think Saudi would be able to sell all the oil it could ship over here?
-
strk
gotta say you have the funniest avatar going - LOL
didn't think it was serious until I realized you were a hater of this admin
too funny
-
What does a pic of Tim Conway in "McHale's Navy" have to do with the admin?
-
Originally posted by Rude
Thats not correct.....it's not oil, but rather hot air and bull ****.
Carry on
Be nice now or no more soup for you.:rofl
-
Originally posted by Eagler
strk
gotta say you have the funniest avatar going - LOL
didn't think it was serious until I realized you were a hater of this admin
too funny
I think it is an interesting comparison to the pic of Bush* in the TANG in his flight suit:
Real sailor vs pretend airman;
Decorated combat veteran vs. Daddy got me in the TANG and I didnt show up for a year;
volunteered to serve in Nam vs. checked Do Not Volunteer for Overseas duty. . . I could go on.
I'm glad you think it is funny. I think Chimpy McFLightsuit is hilarious myself. Except for the 700 dead soldiers and marines because of his lies about WMD in Iraq.
But I guess I'm not "cool" like you.
-
while the loss of allied life in Iraq is indeed tragic, the US Policy since the 1998 "Iraqi Liberation Act" was the ouster of sodomy hooshisname and his lovely sonsabiotches. Yes. please look it up one of you google geniuses I'm too dumb to know how to do it. The problem was that the previous administration was too busy with philandering and other boyish shenanigans to actually attend to the country's business. It took Mr. "chimpy Mcflightsuit" to actually
a. bring some decorum and decency back to the oval office.
b. right all the horrible wrongs of eight long years of president clinton's mistakes and all the misdeeds of her husband billyjeff.
c. put a texas size hurting on the never took a baath party in iraq.
So do me favor, lighten up. We've not had it this good since "Ron (bedtime for bonzo) Reagan" was in office. I predict a Bush victory, maybe not the landslide eagler wants, but if they allow the servicemen's absentee votes to count then perhaps we won't have to use madam cleo to determine the outcome of this one. Not that there was ever any question in my mind regarding the last one.
-
so strk... I guess we can put you down for voting with the women for kerry this election? gonna vote a straight nanny ticket or mix it up with some peace and freedom or green party girls?
lazs
-
Storch gets a gold star for that one.
I'm so tired of the same anti-bush ramblings. 'bush lied', 'bush wasn't really in the airforce', 'bush gave political favors'. What's amusing is that these are all the things that conservatives were able to proove about Clinton, but it was ok then. Now they're just lead alone by JFK^2.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so strk... I guess we can put you down for voting with the women for kerry this election? gonna vote a straight nanny ticket or mix it up with some peace and freedom or green party girls?
lazs
Lmao Lazs... how very... very.. (word searching) normal of you... Do you have these comments in a file somewhere that you can just cut'N'paste out of? You dont actually type the same thing over and over and over and over and over again do you?
dude
-
so I guess we can put you down for the same? it will make your mom happy I'm sure.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
so I guess we can put you down for the same? it will make your mom happy I'm sure.
lazs
Do you/did you make your mom happy? Im certain you did not slap her down and call here a puss pinko commie biatch, did you?? I dont think so.. My point is we do the things we do to make 'US' happy.. Why the need to goto the mom deal?
dude
-
most of us moved out of our moms house as soon as we could so that we could live our lives as we wished. To vote for democrats is like moving back in with mom.
lazs
-
Well, I haven't seen the Larry King episode referred to, but CNN's web site had this article regarding the Woodward interview. It doesn't address the "oil price" issue, but does have some information regarding other areas of dispute in Woodward's book, such as when Powel was informed of the decision to go to war and when Bandar new.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/20/woodward.book/
Sounds to me like many of the assertions Woodward made, those being disputed by the administration, may have been a question of misinterpretation. For instance, Bandar was apparently briefed on the war plan (which Powel had already reviewed numerous times), but Bandar himself said he did not know a decision had been made to proceed until the night before the start of military operations. Woodward may have taken the statement, "Bandar was briefed on the war plan on January 11 (well before the administration says the President made a final decision, and thus before Powel would have been told), and heard "Bandar was briefed on the war decision on January 11." Just a thought.
-
Originally posted by Torque
Be nice now or no more soup for you.:rofl
Yessir:)