On 31/03/2010 12:12 PM, Loogypicker wrote:
On Mar 31, 1:54 pm, I am wrote:
In article69d9ee23-0a10-4147-97fc-
,
says...



In a RESPONSIBLE manner, no less. Wonder how the right's going to say
this is a bad thing?

In a RESPONSIBLE manner, ask a question that is relevant to today's
announcement. Obama did not open offshore drilling, he re-opened
exploration. Try again, when you have read further than the MSNBC false
headlines...snerk

Scotty

--
For a great time, go here first...http://tinyurl.com/ygqxs5v

Gee, whatcha know, I was correct about how the right will say it's a
bad thing. Now, facts are facts. Obama has opened offshore drilling in
areas thus far not opened. But, alas, what you are saying is just not
factual.

"By opening parts of the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico to oil
drilling, the Obama administration wants to tap a huge energy resource
that could keep fuel costs in check.

Doubtful the keeping fuel costs in check has much to do with it. It
likely has more to do with a scenario where US supplies are interupted
or the USD tanks to peso par. US government credit is likely near its
end as it is now more or less debt to perpetuity.

Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack
Obama on Wednesday, March 31, 2010, announced an expansive new policy
that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the
southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of
Alaska.(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, file)
(AP)But don't expect gasoline pump prices to fall anytime soon because
of the new drilling.

Just means the government wants to sell off oil rights for cash. And
now desperate enough to do it.

The offshore areas are located along relatively pristine parts of the
U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, a new frontier for oil companies. It
could take years before drillers will know how much oil can be pumped
from these areas, and when.

Will take 5 to 10 years.

A report by the federal Minerals Management Service noted that most of
the seismic data used to evaluate oil and natural gas resources there
are more than 25 years old. So the information "may not be adequate"
to build maps or develop leases for drilling operations.

Probably isn't. Betcha Obama insiders bought the right stocks.

—Where will companies be allowed to drill?

Any where they want so long as uncle Obama gets his take.

President Obama said Wednesday he'll push for opening offshore areas
in the Gulf of Mexico and off the mid and southern Atlantic coast. Oil
and gas resources would be developed about 50 miles off the Virginia
coast and more than 125 miles from Florida's coast in the eastern Gulf
of Mexico. The government also will allow oil exploration in the
Arctic Ocean. The President doesn't support drilling at Bristol Bay in
Alaska because of environmental concerns. He said proposed leases in
that area would be canceled."

****ed off because Alaska is Repubician, I get it.

Notice "reversing a ban on offshore DRILLING"....

Yep. Nothing like getting a Obama credit card bill and no means to pay
for it... smell of money. And we know how liberal democrats like the spend.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

On 31/03/2010 12:40 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Well, what do you really expect?? We have a black president. That scares
some people. Worse yet, he actually has a brain and uses it.

Ya, and if he was a white president every liberal leftist loser would be
screaming environmental damage.

This is about DC being broke, they need to raise the cash from the leases.

Pure and simple.

wrote in message
...
On Mar 31, 1:54 pm, I am wrote:
In article69d9ee23-0a10-4147-97fc-
,
says...



In a RESPONSIBLE manner, no less. Wonder how the right's going to say
this is a bad thing?

In a RESPONSIBLE manner, ask a question that is relevant to today's
announcement. Obama did not open offshore drilling, he re-opened
exploration. Try again, when you have read further than the MSNBC false
headlines...snerk

Scotty

--
For a great time, go here first...http://tinyurl.com/ygqxs5v

Gee, whatcha know, I was correct about how the right will say it's a
bad thing. Now, facts are facts. Obama has opened offshore drilling in
areas thus far not opened. But, alas, what you are saying is just not
factual.

"By opening parts of the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico to oil
drilling, the Obama administration wants to tap a huge energy resource
that could keep fuel costs in check.

Reversing a ban on oil drilling off most U.S. shores, President Barack
Obama on Wednesday, March 31, 2010, announced an expansive new policy
that could put new oil and natural gas platforms in waters along the
southern Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and part of
Alaska.(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, file)
(AP)But don't expect gasoline pump prices to fall anytime soon because
of the new drilling.

The offshore areas are located along relatively pristine parts of the
U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, a new frontier for oil companies. It
could take years before drillers will know how much oil can be pumped
from these areas, and when.

A report by the federal Minerals Management Service noted that most of
the seismic data used to evaluate oil and natural gas resources there
are more than 25 years old. So the information "may not be adequate"
to build maps or develop leases for drilling operations.

—Where will companies be allowed to drill?

President Obama said Wednesday he'll push for opening offshore areas
in the Gulf of Mexico and off the mid and southern Atlantic coast. Oil
and gas resources would be developed about 50 miles off the Virginia
coast and more than 125 miles from Florida's coast in the eastern Gulf
of Mexico. The government also will allow oil exploration in the
Arctic Ocean. The President doesn't support drilling at Bristol Bay in
Alaska because of environmental concerns. He said proposed leases in
that area would be canceled."

Notice "reversing a ban on offshore DRILLING"....





--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

On 31/03/2010 1:07 PM, Loogypicker wrote:

Uh, no, I didn't lie. YOU said that Obama opened up "exploration".
That's false. He opened up DRILLING.

Funny, you hypocrits. Canada oil sands are bad, now open up ... LMAO...

Drilling and exploration go hand in hand. No one in their right mind
would explore for something they can't drill for.

"could (could) put new oil and natural gas platforms"

What's wrong with that??? It's up to private concerns whether or not
it's profitable. Fact remains, Obama is giving them the opportunity.
This is what the right has been wanting for a LONG time, now it's bad
somehow. Un****ing believable!

No, Obama is desperate for the cash.

Not that I disagree with it, I stand to make some money on it.

The offshore areas are located along relatively pristine parts of the
U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, a new frontier for oil companies. It
could take years before drillers will know how much oil can be pumped
from these areas, and when.

If there indeed is useable oil.

It'll be Obama fault if there isn't??? Again, he's giving them the
chance to drill. Something you've wanted for a long time, now somehow
it's bad....... Talk about unhinged hatred. I thought John was the
king of that.

I like how all it takes is a pinch in the wallet to change peopels minds.

This is hilarious.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

On 31/03/2010 12:37 PM, lil abner wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
In a RESPONSIBLE manner, no less. Wonder how the right's going to say
this is a bad thing?

It won't impact the price of fuel to Americans!

Agreed.

There is already a glut, of supply, of Oil.

Debateable. It would not take much of a recovery to take up the slack
in 30 days or less.

And there is no hope in hell of the US becoming energy self sufficient
in anyones lifetime today bar something innovative like cold fusion that
is bonified real.

Commodities Speculators operate outside our or anyone else's laws.

Ask yourself, if it was do easy and cheap to get oil to market, why
hasn't it been done? Hell, Obama Government Oil Company can compete
with Pemex.

Who knows, Obama has banks, auto now why not nukes and oil?

They are rigging the market. Oil Companies are in concert. They are
cutting production, to ensure higher prices.

You betcha, just like auto and banks.

Anti Trust Laws are ignored because Big Oil has money and spends it on
Legislators.
We get lip service and feigned attacks on price gouging and market rigging.
There is no American Oil Companies. They will take our Oil Resource and
add it to their Global stores. American Production or Resource does not
exist.

In part true. There is a world price, pay or do without. Still cheaper
than US clean bottled water or Starbucks coffee.

London and OPEC and the rest, of the Global Oil Cabal, will use us just
like England used as a colony before the Revolution. Take our Resource
and sell it back to us at artificial and inflated prices.

And guess what is behind it, big government. Guess what, you want big
government. So what are you complaining about? Oh, the American
government is the only one allowed to be maarxist and big?

LMAO.

--
--------------
Politicians don't provide anything, the tax payers do.

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:42:57 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 31/03/2010 12:40 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

Well, what do you really expect?? We have a black president. That scares
some people. Worse yet, he actually has a brain and uses it.

Ya, and if he was a white president every liberal leftist loser would be
screaming environmental damage.

guess canuck doesn't follow the news. they already are. but, because
he's black, 'canuck' kneejerks himself into his typical racist attiude

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:58:05 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 31/03/2010 12:37 PM, lil abner wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
In a RESPONSIBLE manner, no less. Wonder how the right's going to say
this is a bad thing?

It won't impact the price of fuel to Americans!

Agreed.

There is already a glut, of supply, of Oil.

Debateable. It would not take much of a recovery to take up the slack
in 30 days or less.

And there is no hope in hell of the US becoming energy self sufficient
in anyones lifetime today bar something innovative like cold fusion that
is bonified real.

Commodities Speculators operate outside our or anyone else's laws.

Ask yourself, if it was do easy and cheap to get oil to market, why
hasn't it been done? Hell, Obama Government Oil Company can compete
with Pemex.

Who knows, Obama has banks, auto now why not nukes and oil?

amount of the US economy owned by the govt?

0.8%

wow. canuck's right...socialism!!

he's just upset because a black man's in the white house

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:14:52 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:58:05 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 31/03/2010 12:37 PM, lil abner wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
In a RESPONSIBLE manner, no less. Wonder how the right's going to say
this is a bad thing?

It won't impact the price of fuel to Americans!

Agreed.

There is already a glut, of supply, of Oil.

Debateable. It would not take much of a recovery to take up the slack
in 30 days or less.

And there is no hope in hell of the US becoming energy self sufficient
in anyones lifetime today bar something innovative like cold fusion that
is bonified real.

Commodities Speculators operate outside our or anyone else's laws.

Ask yourself, if it was do easy and cheap to get oil to market, why
hasn't it been done? Hell, Obama Government Oil Company can compete
with Pemex.

Who knows, Obama has banks, auto now why not nukes and oil?

amount of the US economy owned by the govt?

0.8%

wow. canuck's right...socialism!!

he's just upset because a black man's in the white house

A black democrat. They can barely abide the Democrat being in there,
the darkie drives 'em crazy!

Doesn't matter that he's no where near progressive or a socialist,
he's black and that means more than anything.

These crackers have no idea how deeply those subconscious trenches go
but it's easy to peer into them in the full light of rec.boats.

On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 20:23:50 -0700, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:04:44 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

and rush loves it...it's part of his fairy tale


I rarely hear Rush.

faux news, then...murdoch's zombie


But being a former small business owner and aware the
mutual fund people are interested in the fee's they make and not really the
rate of return of the fund, I learned about economics. and give credit to
the Democrats who voted the TARP bill that Bush signed. They could have
stopped it easily. They had a majority of Congress. Give Credit to Clinton
and his advisors for pushing the Glass-steagall revision.

really it was phil gramm and his enron VP wife who engineered
deregulation of collateralized debt obligations during revision of the
CFMA...a nice right wing GOP senator from texas

On 4/3/10 10:10 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:26:55 -0400, wrote:

really it was phil gramm and his enron VP wife who engineered
deregulation of collateralized debt obligations during revision of the
CFMA...a nice right wing GOP senator from texas


... with the support of Greenspan, Summers, Rubin and Gethner who
worked directly for Clinton..


Nothing would have happened if Gramm wasn't pushing it. You know what he
does now, right? He's pimping for a swiss bank.

--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 10:10:13 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:26:55 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

really it was phil gramm and his enron VP wife who engineered
deregulation of collateralized debt obligations during revision of the
CFMA...a nice right wing GOP senator from texas


... with the support of Greenspan, Summers, Rubin and Gethner who
worked directly for Clinton..

gee. the GOP has run the govt for 22 of the last 30 years.

and what did they do to protect us?

nothing. and greenspan? he worked for bush