Booster4324 Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100331/ap_on_..._obama_drilling What's the catch?
DC Tom Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 What's the catch? It allows the administration to demonize oil companies for environmental exploitation and garnering record profits at the expense of the American people, thereby giving the administration an excuse to take over yet another industry.
Magox Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100331/ap_on_..._obama_drilling What's the catch? As funny as Tom's comment was I would say it is more political than anything else. It's a center right issue, the far left doesn't agree with it, but the center often times determines elections. Having said that, it's a good thing in the overall scheme of becoming more energy independent.
DC Tom Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 As funny as Tom's comment was I would say it is more political than anything else. It's a center right issue, the far left doesn't agree with it, but the center often times determines elections. Having said that, it's a good thing in the overall scheme of becoming more energy independent. My comment was meant only in humor...but you know as wells off the coast mature and start generating income and profits for the oil companies, people will start bitching about how unfair it is that they're making so much money and completely forget the why and how of the political decision.
IDBillzFan Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 As funny as Tom's comment was I would say it is more political than anything else. It's a center right issue, the far left doesn't agree with it, but the center often times determines elections. Having said that, it's a good thing in the overall scheme of becoming more energy independent. I suspect coming off health care, he's trying to launch his popularity with a slingshot-like rise. He passes health care, he goes to Afghanistan, he cuts a nukes deal with Russia, he has dinner with Sarkozy, and he's three days away from seeing that the US added 200,000 jobs last month. Granted, anyone paying attention knows the jobs growth is from the temporary Census hirings, but it looks good to most people, and with a big enough fling of short-term popularity, he can probably start the push to provide amnesty to all those voters standing in the wings waiting for their free health care.
3rdnlng Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 As funny as Tom's comment was I would say it is more political than anything else. It's a center right issue, the far left doesn't agree with it, but the center often times determines elections. Having said that, it's a good thing in the overall scheme of becoming more energy independent. I'll believe it when I see it. He's very good at saying one thing and acting differently. I somehow have a problem believing that he is serious since energy independance is not in line with his agenda. I wouldn't put it past him to create conditions that would make it not economically feasible.
pBills Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 It allows the administration to demonize oil companies for environmental exploitation and garnering record profits at the expense of the American people, thereby giving the administration an excuse to take over yet another industry. DOMINATION OF INDUSTRY BY THE EEEEEVIL ADMINISTRATION [insert evil laugh here]
Magox Posted March 31, 2010 Posted March 31, 2010 My comment was meant only in humor...but you know as wells off the coast mature and start generating income and profits for the oil companies, people will start bitching about how unfair it is that they're making so much money and completely forget the why and how of the political decision. Oh I know you were just jesting, but sadly I agree, there is no doubt in my mind that as we get towards the 2012 elections, oil prices will be above $100 Barrel and they will look to target the next "evil" corporation. I'm sure of it. And to LA Billz, you're right, over the next three months there are to be over 900,000 census workers to be hired, of course they are only part time and will be virtually all back in the unemployment lines by August. I don't know if you caught it, but the ADP report which covers the private sector showed a disappointing net loss of jobs. That surprised many people. The other things that we have to watch out for is that today marks the end of the quantative easing of the mortgage and treasury purchases. And next month will end the $8000 tax credit for new home buyers. It will be very interesting to see how the market reacts to the withdrawals of these stimulative actions, specially considering that the housing market has already began to show signs of further weakness. It looks to me that the housing market is set to go another leg down, and my guess is that at some point in the year, if rates go up a decent bit higher and housing and jobs remain as weak they are today that the Federal reserve will look to expand their balance sheet again with further MBS and Treasury purchases. And further down the rabbit hole we go.
PearlHowardman Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 "Drill, baby, Drill!' -Sarah Palin I'm surprised that conservatives here doubt Obama re: drilling for oil. Last week Obama pretty much GUARANTEED that the greedy health care insurance companies will get $366 billion over 10 years. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/03/a...lion-check.html "To help pay for the new insurance requirements the government would give to people money to buy insurance - $336 billion over the next ten years. That money, ultimately, would have to go to... drum roll... insurance companies"
pBills Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 "Drill, baby, Drill!' -Sarah Palin I'm surprised that conservatives here doubt Obama re: drilling for oil. Last week Obama pretty much GUARANTEED that the greedy health care insurance companies will get $366 billion over 10 years. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/03/a...lion-check.html "To help pay for the new insurance requirements the government would give to people money to buy insurance - $336 billion over the next ten years. That money, ultimately, would have to go to... drum roll... insurance companies" F her that dumbass muppet. On insurance companies... where did you think the money would go? Funny thing is that is would probably cost more having people use the ER as their primary care with no insurance.
3rdnlng Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 F her that dumbass muppet. On insurance companies... where did you think the money would go? Funny thing is that is would probably cost more having people use the ER as their primary care with no insurance. Do you have any idea whatsoever how insurance works? Do you know what the approximate PM is in the healthcare insurance industry?
Chef Jim Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 F her that dumbass muppet. On insurance companies... where did you think the money would go? Funny thing is that is would probably cost more having people use the ER as their primary care with no insurance. Cost more to who?
Booster4324 Posted April 1, 2010 Author Posted April 1, 2010 F her that dumbass muppet. Does this make Sarah Palin gay? That's kinda hot.
pBills Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Does this make Sarah Palin gay? That's kinda hot. Not to VABills. He would have her banned from the U.S.
Alaska Darin Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 F her that dumbass muppet. On insurance companies... where did you think the money would go? Funny thing is that is would probably cost more having people use the ER as their primary care with no insurance. Great talking point, $56k.
pBills Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Great talking point, $56k. Talking point? I would love to see how much it costs the American public per year when people go to the ER for their primary care since they don't have insurance.
VABills Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Not to VABills. He would have her banned from the U.S. I have no problem with gay people. I just don't want their opinion about gays being "shoved down my throat" or my children. You wanna suck some guys dick good for you, just keep it to yourself. As the old saying goes, a gentleman never tells. Well maybe if the gay community didn't shout it from the rooftop there might be a little more acceptablity.
Alaska Darin Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 I have no problem with gay people. I just don't want their opinion about gays being "shoved down my throat" or my children. You wanna suck some guys dick good for you, just keep it to yourself. As the old saying goes, a gentleman never tells. Well maybe if the gay community didn't shout it from the rooftop there might be a little more acceptablity. Maybe if you zealots practiced what you preached, they wouldn't have to.
pBills Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 I have no problem with gay people. I just don't want their opinion about gays being "shoved down my throat" or my children. You wanna suck some guys dick good for you, just keep it to yourself. As the old saying goes, a gentleman never tells. Well maybe if the gay community didn't shout it from the rooftop there might be a little more acceptablity. Sorry your whole rant on PBS and Gays was outstanding. I do agree with you on the premise that no one needs to know. Keep your private life, private.
John Adams Posted April 1, 2010 Posted April 1, 2010 Sorry your whole rant on PBS and Gays was outstanding. I do agree with you on the premise that no one needs to know. Keep your private life, private. Wow, for just a second, I thought you and me would be on the same side of an issue. How exactly should a gay person make it so "no one needs to know" and "keep it provate." You act like most gay people are prancing in leather in the gay pride parades when in fact, most gay people are going to work 5 days a week, watching American Idol, taking their kids to soccer, worrying about the mortgage...etc. They are living their lives...but with someone of their same sex. Are they supposed to go to dinner separately, because as you say, "no one needs to know?"
Recommended Posts