Gas or hot-air ?

1. 67

   SparklingJewelposted 15 years ago

   “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes lifting the moratorium on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and on the Outer Continental Shelf. She won’t even allow it to come to a vote. With $4 gas having massively shifted public opinion in favor of domestic production, she wants to protect her Democratic members from having to cast an anti-drilling election-year vote.
   Moreover, given the public mood, she might even lose. This cannot be permitted. Why? Because as she explained to Politico: ‘I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet.’ A lovely sentiment... There are a dizzying number of economic and national security arguments for drilling at home: a $700 billion oil balance-of-payment deficit, a gas tax (equivalent) levied on the paychecks of American workers and poured into the treasuries of enemy and terror-supporting regimes, growing dependence on unstable states of the Persian Gulf and Caspian basin.
   Pelosi and the Democrats stand athwart shouting: We don’t care. We come to save the planet! They seem blissfully unaware that the argument for their drill-there-not-here policy collapses on its own environmental terms.” —Charles Krauthammer

   replyreport
   1. 60

      leftquarkposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge will only supply us with 3% of our oil needs and it will take 10 years for oil production to reach that capacity.  20% of our oil comes from the Middle East.  We can easily cut 20% of our oil usage with conservation.  All it takes is a little effort on the part of every American.

      replyreport
2. 0

   RFoxposted 15 years ago

   Anyone who thinks drilling in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge is a good idea has never lived up north.
   
   It's a quick fix that will screw up this planet more than people realize.
   The arctic is a fragile ecosystem that has a HUGE impact on the rest of the world and our weather systems.
   
   Why is it that no-one ever thinks of the long term impact of these things on our standard of living?
   
   It's all short term thinking. "Oil is expensive, we are fighting wars over it, so lets drill in Alaska instead!"
   
   The Arctic and Antarctic need to be protected for our future. Just ask scientists why they are so worried about it.
   
   IMHO
   
   

   replyreport
3. 60

   knolyourselfposted 15 years ago

   Is this the same 'Charles Krauthammer' who was a signature signer to PNAC, a 'Project for a New American Century', the plan for American domination of the world for the 21st Century, that has bankrupted the US, and has embroiled the US in endless war?

   replyreport
   1. 67

      SparklingJewelposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      don'tknow...tell me...show me the research

      replyreport
4. 60

   knolyourselfposted 15 years ago

   'don'tknow...tell me...show me the research'
   http://www.king-george.biz/wst_page5.html

   replyreport
5. 60

   knolyourselfposted 15 years ago

   PNAC:
   http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf … le2041.htm

   replyreport
6. 61

   epictruthposted 15 years ago

   I'm on hubpages but I tend to write more articles on my blog and the discussion of oil comes up a lot. Not sure if it'll be helpful but let me know. Thanks!
   
   http://www.theepictruth.com/

   replyreport
7. 59

   Mark Knowlesposted 15 years ago

   Here's a thought - The US has spent, what? $650 billion on the Iraqi war?
   
   I wonder if that money had been put into placing solar panels and wind turbines out in the desert - where there is not much other than sunshine and wind lol - how much renewable energy that would have created?

   replyreport
8. 60

   knolyourselfposted 15 years ago

   That would be intellegent. Against the law in America. The ruling class and the corporations have a history of destroying things
   like public transportation, trains, public energy for the sake of private profit, oil, cars and tires.

   replyreport