Want to sign?  I did!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

-P.

I signed!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Signed and sent.

I firmly believe that there is a very LOUD minority that is blocking energy exploration in the USA.  These are the folks that you find with all that extra time on their hands that the majority dosn't seem to have because they are to busy working to feed themselves and put a roof over their head and heating....with oil and gas.

-P.

Paul98 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 7:36pm:

I firmly believe that there is a very LOUD minority that is blocking energy exploration in the USA.  .

Yeah, his name is Al Gore, screaming and yelling while sucking up enough energy to equal five families!

Did you see all the bigwigs pull up to the hospital to visit fatboy?......Everyone of them driving an SUV! They dont give a shit, they can afford $15 a gallon gas, but we are suppose to suffer.

John kerry says his five SUV's are not his, "They are owned by my family".....What kind of shit is that?

Fuckin scumbags! >:( >:( >:(

wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 8:00pm:

Paul98 wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 7:36pm: I firmly believe that there is a very LOUD minority that is blocking energy exploration in the USA.  . Yeah, his name is Al Gore, screaming and yelling while sucking up enough energy to equal five families! Did you see all the bigwigs pull up to the hospital to visit fatboy?......Everyone of them driving an SUV! They dont give a shit, they can afford $15 a gallon gas, but we are suppose to suffer. John kerry says his five SUV's are not his, "They are owned by my family".....What kind of shit is that? Fuckin scumbags! >:( >:( >:(

Um, Bro, I think WE are the ones buying their gas!  Don't think for a minute that when they pull up into DC their travel expenses are coming out of their pocket!

Until their nuts start to ache from being squeezed there will be no change.

-P.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Paul98 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 7:36pm:

busy working to feed themselves and put a roof over their head and heating....with oil and gas.

Paul, I am amazed at the hard working people who drive distances to a job hoping for something to change, that this is temporary.  People who bought trucks because they love them, now saying it cost a hundred dollars a week to fill.  
 Between gas and food many are treading into deeper water.  Very, very stressful but you're right, not being heard.  This can develop more crime, we don't need it increasing in the future but it tends to go with these circumstances if they continue.  

Kevin_M wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 10:36pm:

[quote author=142531287D7C440 link=1212175157/0#3 date=1212190583]This can develop more crime, we don't need it increasing in the future but it tends to go with these circumstances if they continue.

Yeah, but did you sign the petetion, bro?

I'd drill in my own yard if I thought it would help Paul.
May not happen anytime soon...or ever. But I'd like to see hydrogen or whatever else replace gasoline.


 Being a car freak all my life and liking blown big block Chevys that get 3 miles to the gallon, I thought I'd never say it, but we are in trouble and need to do something to replace gasoline.

Wanna see the terrorist types (not that all middle easterners are) go broke & eat sand....cut off their money supply by making their oil worth less.  >:(   Cutting off someones money supply will hurt them more than picking them off one by one in a useless war...hit em in the pocketbook.

I dont know how we would go about it or if we even have time left to do it. But I sure would like to see our dependence to oil reduced or eliminated someday.
Cheers, Dave

By the way, slammin' new board layout...even got an eyeball on fire.  ;) ;) ;)

John Kerry......it always gets me that the Democrats couldn't come up with a way to beat Geoge Bush in 2004...Unbelieveable! That took some real work.

There were a lot of small wells here....still are. We're not that far from the Drake well. It seems that no matter the source, we're stuck. It's never going to be cheap again.

Do I have to open the You Tube stuff? It can take 45 minutes?

Charlie

Charlie wrote on May 31^st, 2008 at 2:21am:

John Kerry......it always gets me that the Democrats couldn't come up with a way to beat Geoge Bush in 2004...Unbelieveable! That took some real work. There were a lot of small wells here....still are. We're not that far from the Drake well. It seems that no matter the source, we're stuck. It's never going to be cheap again. Do I have to open the You Tube stuff? It can take 45 minutes? Charlie

We have some new small wells going in here too Charlie.  These smaller gas wells take 1-3 weeks to drill down ~3000-5000 feet and when done you can drive by them not 50' off the road and not ever realize you passed a gas well.  Already the enviros are puting up readblocks to these innocus wells going in.

-P.

During the recent hearings, this was remarked:

"We can't drill our way to lower prices," said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

I don't know what this is based on but the opportunity to drill has not been absent from oil options.

Here's an interesting story:


Quote:

Exxon Mobil Corp. wants Alaska to pay $800 million in damages, claiming Monday the state breached a deal when it revoked gas and oil leases on a North Slope oil field. Point Thomson holds nearly one-fourth of the 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves the state and the industry hope one day to ship in a gas line to Midwestern markets. Exxon Mobil, BP PLC and Chevron purchased leases 31 years ago allowing them to drill at Point Thomson. However, they have not produced any oil or gas from the tracts. The lack of activity prompted the state to try to reclaim the leases in late 2006 and give other companies the opportunity to move forward with development at Point Thomson. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Only after getting the claim revoked did they say a project is in the works that will take about six years.  Alaska wants to give others the opportunity -- to drill.


con't, too long.

Bakken was discovered in the mid-50's and its center has three layers of shale, formed when the area was covered with fairly deep ocean about 2 miles down.  Conventional drilling didn't make sense, at today's prices it does with newer techniques.  Should we give Exxon North Dakota so they will do nothing again?

Exxon's return on capital is 23.5%, the average for other major oil and gas companies is 17.7%, the average for Standard and Poor's 500 Index is 10.7%.

If refining it will drag down their return, why drill.  Exporting to Asia and back to refine will add maybe nine dollars a barrel.

This was said at the hearings also:


Quote:

Profits have been huge "in absolute terms," conceded J. Stephen Simon, executive vice president of Exxon Mobil Corp., but they "must be viewed in the context of the massive scale of our industry." And high earnings "in the current up cycle" are needed for investments in the long term, including when profits will be down.

Their investments?  Here they are:


Quote:

In management's estimation, investing more in exploration and development would not be a sound business decision at this time. Such investments would not generate the high level of return the company targets in its investment decisions. Could ExxonMobil reinvest more in the business of finding oil? Absolutely. But ExxonMobil has decided not to. Instead of investing in projects that don't meet its target for return on investment ExxonMobil continues to buy back stock -- $32.6 billion worth in 2006, $31.8 billion in 2007 and $8 billion in the first quarter of 2008 alone. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

No incentive in constructing if the advantage is only to the buyer -- you and me.

I signed along with my wife.  Thanks Paul.

Jerry

Here this week, I've seen the price of petrol go up by 5p (10 cents) a litre in 5 days. And diesel is at £1.30 a litre here.

It's all gone mad. How are people supposed to afford that?

  Drill here, cap the wells. Use up every bit of oil from the OPEC countries we can. Develop whatever alternatives, we clever Americans can figure out. Uncap our wells. And tell the OPEC countries to live on sand like their forefathers did.
  Screw the lot of them. Suckem dry like a raisen. In the long run, we still win.
[smiley=smokin.gif]

Have you signed?.....WTF?  >:(

I guess you will when its $10 a gallon and its to late!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Oil was less than 30 dollars a barrel when George Bush took over and had a Republican Congress

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 7^th, 2008 at 7:56pm:

Oil was less than 30 dollars a barrel when George Bush took over and had a Republican Congress Charlie

And when the Dems took over congress and held all the hearings to "get to the bottom" of all this.....Oil went from ~$70/bbl to ~$140.  

Charlie, I don't think it makes a bit of difference what party is in office with respect to the price of oil.  The price per bbl is the same in the US as it is in Europe, China or Africia.  It is the speculators and demand that are driving it.  The only way to lower the price is to flood the market so the incentive to speculate is gone and there is no tight supply.  More wells and more refineries and put a bounty on finding alternative energy sources like we did for the Manhattan Project.

-P.

Bear in mind that Bush vetoes just about everything sent to him since 2006.

Still, I have to agree that it doesn't seem to matter. It's greed at levels hard to comprehend. If people choose to accept oil companies explanations......well okey dokey. These people are delighted at the price of oil. I wonder just what they would do with a glut. I don't trust anything I get from them.

A Manhattan-type project as well as real development of electric cars wouldn't hurt.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 7^th, 2008 at 10:11pm:

Bear in mind that Bush vetoes just about everything sent to him since 2006. Still, I have to agree that it doesn't seem to matter. It's greed at levels hard to comprehend. If people choose to accept oil companies explanations......well okey dokey. These people are delighted at the price of oil. I wonder just what they would do with a glut. I don't trust anything I get from them. A Manhattan-type project as well as real development of electric cars wouldn't hurt. Charlie

I would bet you would find many in congress have stocks in the oil companys....Both sides of the isle.  As long as THEY profit they don't give a hoot about the rest of us.

With regards to eletric; anything that plugs into the grid to recharge is very inefficient.  If the source of the generation is hydro than it is not bad but if the source is coal, oil or NG than that KWH of power you put into the car probably started out as 2 KWH at the source in raw fuel.  

Maybe the Amish have it right. ;)  ...Oh wait a minute, flatulance....can't have that!   :)

-P.

It looks like things are beginning to happen in the Dakotas but still a couple years away.


Quote:

SD approves new oil pipeline by Cara Hetland, Minnesota Public Radio March 12, 2008 The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission has unanimously approved a construction permit for a new oil pipeline. According to TransCanada, the 2,148-mile Keystone Pipeline will transport crude oil from Alberta to U.S. Midwest markets in Illinois and Oklahoma. The Keystone pipeline will have an initial nominal capacity of 435,000 barrels per day in late 2009 and will be expanded to a nominal capacity of 590,000 barrels per day in late 2010. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

North Dakota oil finds a big one by Dan Gunderson, Minnesota Public Radio April 11, 2008 The problem has been how to get that oil out of the ground. It's not a pool you drill down to because this oil is in the rocks. But new technology makes it easier to collect that oil. The USGS study says with todays technology, about 4 billion barrels of oil can be pumped from the Bakken formation. "We know there's a lot more oil in the Bakken Shale, so does the USGS," Dorgan says. "Under todays technology that cannot be recovered. With tomorrows technology it likely could." Dorgan says the release of the USGS [U.S. Geological Survey] study should encourage more investment in pipelines, or perhaps a refinery in the state. Oil companies are already working to drill hundreds of new wells in North Dakota. If oil prices stay high, it's likely the boom in North Dakotas oil patch will continue. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

South Dakota voters approve rezoning for oil refinery by Cara Hetland, Minnesota Public Radio June 4, 2008 Sioux Falls, S. D. -- Voters in Union County South Dakota supported a plan to rezone 3,300 acres for an oil refinery. The planned $10 billion refinery is proposed by Hyperion Resources of Texas. Plans call for construction to begin in the year 2010. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:(This is a boring but insightfull video, check out all 8 or them!     John

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Why the hell would we want to use our own oil.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

This is where I would put the smiley shooting himself in the head if I could find it.

Mike

This whole oil crisis is making me think about just not getting my driver's license altogether...

Seriously, we need to be able to wean ourselves of the 'loving' bosom that is the OPEC countries, and we need to get on our own feet as a nation again.

JuniorBrew wrote on Jun 11^th, 2008 at 8:48pm:

Seriously, we need to be able to wean ourselves of the 'loving' bosom that is the OPEC countries, and we need to get on our own feet as a nation again.

How do suggest we do that?

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Feel free anybody....

Seriously, my hope is to find more oil but at the same time, make it less and less important. It can be done. We're supposed to be good at this kind of thing.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 11^th, 2008 at 9:57pm:

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Feel free anybody.... Seriously, my hope is to find more oil but at the same time, make it less and less important. It can be done. We're supposed to be good at this kind of thing. Charlie

When it comes down to there being no other choice, either someone will create the technology or more likely - the technology that has existed for years but has been suppressed by the oil companies will be released.  Hopefully they don't wait until it is too late.

It's like the old quote by Winston Churchill you used to use said:

Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities.

I can certainly see the reason why the oil industry doesn't want to drill their way to lower revenue......but I don't see why they don't purchase or research other fuel.  Whether its electrolosis or hydrogen or whatever, there's money to be made if you have the investment.

We all know they have the means to fund it.  

wrote on Jun 11^th, 2008 at 9:09pm:

JuniorBrew wrote on Jun 11th, 2008 at 8:48pm: Seriously, we need to be able to wean ourselves of the 'loving' bosom that is the OPEC countries, and we need to get on our own feet as a nation again. How do suggest we do that?

It is going to take the kind of focus and commitment  that we had when we decided to put a man on the moon.  Apollo was the largest non-military program in the history of the country.  

monty wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 9:11am:

It is going to take the kind of focus and commitment  that we had when we decided to put a man on the moon.  Apollo was the largest non-military program in the history of the country.

Sputnik inadvertantly established the principle that satellite "overflight was not a violation of air space.  A rude awakening in the age of nuclear weapons.    

It took ten years.

Launching required ballistic missiles, the interservice agencies were heavily involved, JPL essentially an army missile lab operated by Caltech, the Navy had a research lab for their Vanguard, USAF built IRBMs based on the Atlas program.  Once in awhile a collaboration would be attempted -- the USAF/Army's Thor/Jupiter.  
 There was pre-NASA's ARPA (Advanced Research Project Agency - a holding company for military space programs), NACA (Nat'l Advisory Committee for Aeronautics) and ABMA (Army Ballistic Missile Agency)

NASA started operation 01 Aug 58, taking ABMA, JPL, NACA's three research labs, and was promised the Navy's Vanguard group, later named Goddard Space Center.  
 
Yes though, Ike stepped in to stop interservice rivalry, he and Johnson shared a primary motivation that the U.S. needed separate civilian and scientific space programs.  The army continued to run national security space projects and at the time most thought they'd dominate in the end.  Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo were all aimed at the moon, in steps.

most info from a von Braun bio.


Today it seems a defined posing threat is needed, climate change is not immediate enough perhaps or yet concerning enough, pricing a slow bleed.  Cold war factors influenced a space jump and the Manhatten Project was instilled as a race to beat the Germans, who were also thought to be ahead of us.  

The only problem with putting a man on the moon was you didn't pick the right one...

18 billion barrels in Anwr;  ~400 billion barrels in the Bakken Formation;  ~1500 billion recoverable barrels of oil shale;  estimated 1,000 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.  And this doesn’t count the huge reserve of Methane locked up in Methane Hydrate ~400,000 Trillion cubic feet of Methane.  (Methane Hydrate is a pure white crystalline lattice of water ice that has methane molecules trapped in it. Each methane molecule has six water molecules holding it in place. And, a single unit of methane hydrate, when heated and depressurized, releases 160 times its volume in natural gas.   By comparison the total amount of oil under Saudi Arabia is about 200 billion barrels.  And finally if you consider our coal reserves and the fact that at current prices it is highly economical to produce liquid fuels from coal, we probably have enough fossil reserves to supply US needs for at least a thousand years – much more if all our electrical needs are produced by nuclear plants.

Blame the Bunnymen.

-P.

Paul98 wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 3:24pm:

Blame the Bunnymen. -P.

That would be the environmentalists for those of you in Rio Linda.  [smiley=grin2.gif]  


You also have to add the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) social elite crowd on the coasts who want more oil, more gas and more power, but will not allow anything to be built in their areas.  They are more than willing to set up oil rigs in the Gulf and nuclear waste facilities in Nevada and wind turbine farms in the Midwest, but not on their coast lines or hillsides, etc.

I signed it, hope I don't get a bunch of damned spam.  

Edit to add, wishful thinking on my part...... :-/

Paul98 wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 3:24pm:

Blame the Bunnymen.

Or the economists.  America was pumping lots of oil in America, but the cheap easy-to-get-to stuff was either used up or being pumped as fast as possible.  Lots of marginal producers in the US then went bankrupt, even though oil was still under the ground. It just cost too much to bring it to the surface.

US production expanded in the 70s and early 80s with high prices, then shrunk when prices dropped.  Tar sands need high prices to be feasible - oil shale, even more so. Methane hydrate has potential, but the technology is not there - there is no commercial utilization of that at all yet.

I have to agree with Monty.  8-)

Yesterday, a lot of New York State bigwigs were here in my little town giving us the okay to build a carbon-capturing coal-fired power plant to replace the one we have which is supposed to be one of the dirtiest in the country....you could fool me. I didn't know it was so and the thing is that we don't need our own plant because we get almost all our power from Niagara Falls. Still, it looks like we will spend a shitload of cash to replace the plant we don't use with this new idea. I think they have one of these under construction or in use in Norway. Everybody here knows that our rates will go through the roof. For now, Jamestown has incredibly cheap power. I paid $19 last month. I wonder how long this thing will take? It might be interesting though.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 9:11pm:

I have to agree with Monty.  8-)Jamestown has incredibly cheap power. I paid $19 last month.

$19 for electric?....If so, Christ, im paying way over a hundred!

19 bucks is it Jonny. Bear in mind that I live alone and use an oil fired computer.  8-)

Next month will be more than $25 with my central air conditioner. Normally, I pay a little more than $20. I can't complain.

Charlie

How in the hell can Jamestown have such cheap power?  Back when i wasnt even living here, the electric was like $75.

Look at your bill and see how many KW you used.  I am curious.  

I checked and 222 kwh is the consumption for May. We are spoiled in this town and we are really steamed that it's likely to go up more than usual in a few years. If you add in sewer, water and the like, the total is about $60. Gas runs about $143 a month on balanced billing.

The thing is that if you go just a few miles outside the city, the rates for Niagara are similar to yours.

Charlie

What are you, Amish or something?  You only used 222kwh?

I use about 1400 - 1800 kwh a month, with a gas furnace and gas water heater.  I also replaced most of the bulbs with CFLs, which made a noticable difference.

I sometimes use 222kwh in a weekend.  

That's what it says: comsumption 222 kwh.

Shit. I fall asleep with the TV on all the time. It must be some kind of accounting thing. It's the only thing I can think of.

It does seem odd though.

Charlie

Psssst....Charlie, never complain about your bill to the electric company!.....LOL  ;)

hi folks, i am new to this site, but i have worked for one of the worlds largest oil companies for a long time. i am no CEO or white collar guy, just a grunt in the trenches, but i do still have half a brain and can read. ( and NO, i dont get free gas, or even a discount!). and one thing ALL of us in the refinery KNOW is this,,, THERE IS PLENTY OF OIL. there is NO shortage,!!! i repeat, there is NO shortage. if you want to blame the prices on someone, its easy to blame the big three, after all look at their profits, but ,, this is america, a company in this country has ONE MAIN OBJECTIVE,,,,, to make MONEY!!!!! PERIOD.  one thing i do know is this,, everytime a little grass-hut in the middle of south america with one little pump,( the size of your basement sump-pump) gets taken over by six guys with masks and AK47's, speculators on wall street " freak out" and drive the price of a barrel up $2.00. i dont have the answers folks, hell, i dont have any answers, just trying to sate a few facts.    Tuck

Someone is getting rich, and it aint us! >:(

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie wrote on Jun 13^th, 2008 at 8:22pm:

comsumption 222 kwh.

A little evening street light through the windows

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

a favorite AM radio station, a box of Crackerjacks,  

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

and a cold one in the icebox.   ;)

Remember the election in 2006?
Thought you might like to read the following:




A little over one year ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over  $4.10  a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to  5 .5 %(a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate
(stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% +  of American homes are in foreclosure &nb sp;

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

wrote on Jun 13^th, 2008 at 10:49pm:

Remember the election in 2006? Thought you might like to read the following: A little over one year ago: 1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high; 2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon; 3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%. Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen: 1) Consumer confidence plummet; 2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over  $4.10  a gallon; 3) Unemployment is up to  5 .5 %(a 10% increase); 4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses); 5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars; 6) 1% +  of American homes are in foreclosure &nb sp; America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Here I thought all of that had to do with my new deodorant... it was about the same time I switched brands.

with warm regards,
Tony

And the man in charge who vetoed or threatened to veto any progressive legislation is? And the party on the right determined to undermine progressive legislation by filibuster is and did its best to try to negate the results of the 2006 election is?

Charlie

   And what "progressive" legislation has this congress come up with that the man in charged vetoed. To be honest, I haven't seen any good bill come out of the congress that wasn't full of pork and welfare.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

This isn't the right stopping them for drilling here.

Mike

P.S. As I pay my bills, I see that I used 222KWH and it cost me $23.48. And no, I'm not Amish either... ;D

Steve Milloy. It rang a bell. He's a well-known apologist for big oil, and just about anything that will make him a buck writing to please those with deep pockets. Typical Fox stuff. Nothing he writes about oil can be trusted.

Nonetheless, it would be nice if there is enough oil to pump but it would also be nice to work on alternate sources at the same time. It boils down to whom would you believe: Those that stand to make tens of billions pumping oil or those that stand to make very little. Who do you think would have the most to gain by wild exaggeration?

I'm not against drilling but I don't rely on FOX BS to light the way.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 9:11pm:

I paid $19 last month.

Had to check my bill for May, Charlie.  $18.74, by a nose!   ;)


Ah yes, Steve Milloy.

Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and DemandDebate.com. He is a junk science expert, advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.




Quote:

Steven J. Milloy, began his career with TASSC. The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) is a now defunct industry-funded PR front group run by the APCO Worldwide public relations firm. It worked to hang the label of "junk science" on environmentalists. Created in 1993, TASSC began as a front for Philip Morris... The Philip Morris effort also spawned the "junk science" home page. junkscience.com writer/editor/publisher Steven Milloy worked for TASSC, ultimately as its executive director before the sham operation was allowed to fade out of existence: Citizens for the Integrity of Science [in 1999], and the debunked TASSC share the same address at 1155 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 300 in Washington, DC. [9] This is the same phone number and address Milloy has used for the Citizens for the Integrity of Science, Junkscience.com, NoMoresScares.com, and of course, the defunct The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition. Milloy, an 'Adjunk' Scholar at Cato Institute encountered Rupert Murdoch during Murdock's term as Cato Director -- thus leading to Milloy's Junk Science columns on Fox News website and newspapers. [I've previously listed the "scholars" on the oil payroll for the Cato Institute in a different thread.]   START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

The Independent (UK), Sept. 20, 2005

One reason why Western governments have been slow to respond to the climate crisis is that they are under constant pressure from lobbying groups that defend the interests of eco-unfriendly industry.

The selection of groups profiled here gives you some idea of how corporate money and politics mix.

1. THE COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Where are they based?
Washington, DC

What do they believe?
... that global warming is a European plot to damage US competitiveness. The CEI ­ funded by Exxon Mobil ­ unleash a torrent of press releases uncovering "flaws" in the work of climatologists who believe in climate change.

2. THE AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Where are they based?Washington, DC

and on and on...

Here is another side of that story Steven Milloy reported on:




Quote:

An appeal board of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rejected required air permits for ConocoPhillips planned expansion of its Wood River Refinery in Roxana, Ill. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) led the challenge, which argued that harmful air pollution from the refinery's flares, which relieve pressure in the refining process, was not being sufficiently controlled. The decision means ConocoPhillips will have to come up with a plan to hold flare emissions down. "Our intention is not to stop the expansion project, but to ensure that the refinery lives up to the standards of the Clean Air Act and its protections for the people who live and work nearby," Ann Alexander, senior attorney for the NRDC and lead litigator on the challenge, said in a statement. "ConocoPhillips simply ignored the requirement to find and use the best available pollution control technology." A ConocoPhillips spokesperson was not immediately available for comment. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Steve Milloy is an adjunct scholar of Competitive Enterprise Institute.  For 2006, this is a listed accomplishment on the CEI website:


Quote:

2006 In early February, CEI goes on the offensive over the media furor regarding syndicated columnists being paid to write favorable op-eds for clients. Senior Fellow Iain Murray states in an op-ed, "What are Op-Eds for?" published in The American Spectator , "An opinion piece--whether an individual op-ed or a column--exists to promote a point of view by argument. It does not seek to establish a fact, but to win people over to a particular viewpoint or opinion." START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

We need a Theodore Roosevelt Kev.

Charlie

  Believe me, if someone came up with an alternative energy, I would praise him/her/it as much as anyone (notice how wonderfully PC I am there..... ;D).  That fact being that more of the oil being produced is of the heavier, more polluting kind.  That includes a lot of the stuff on this side of the pond.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

   Perhaps I shouldn't listen to WSJ BS either. We can't have it both ways. You use non-polluting refiners, use the "lighter" crude. The stuff that our "good friends" have, and becoming rarer. If you don't use any nuclear plants, you have no nuclear waste. If you don't put up any windmills in Ted Kennedy's back yard, you have no wind power either. You use corn for ethanol, you get higher food prices (and I thought mandating it was wrong, by the way). Ya can hate the messenger, but the message is the same. Until there is an alternative energy or we use a lot less than we do now, we need to do what we can to produce more or we are stuck with high prices. And then don't bitch to me.
   By the way Charlie, you never did answer my question of what progressive legislation did our fine and wonderful congress come up with that Bush vetoed?

Mike

P.S. You know I love you, man.
 

Edit to fix typing spams and to throw this in, anacana I thought it was funny.... :)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

M.R. wrote on Jun 15^th, 2008 at 7:46pm:

Ya can hate the messenger, but the message is the same. Until there is an alternative energy or we use a lot less than we do now, we need to do what we can to produce more or we are stuck with high prices.

This messenger isn't looking for alternative energy or using less:


Quote:

DALLAS -- Rex Tillerson, chairman and chief executive of Exxon Mobil Corp. ... his company views it as its "corporate social responsibility" to continue to supply the world with fossil fuels. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I like his slipping in the use of "corporate social responsibility."



Quote:

Corporate social responsibility (CSR, also called corporate responsibility, corporate citizenship, and responsible business) is a concept whereby organizations consider the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact of their activities on customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, communities and other stakeholders, as well as the environment. This obligation is seen to extend beyond the statutory obligation to comply with legislation and sees organizations voluntarily taking further steps to improve the quality of life for employees and their families as well as for the local community and society at large. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Wow, has that term now mutated.

signed

What has Bush vetoed: It's more his threats than vetoes that make our beloved supremely elected President so popular. Bush's veto of SCHIP (Expansion of health care for children) comes to mind, which 81 percent of the public supports.  

The farm bill with all its flaws contained something like ten billion dollars for nutrition programs---food stamps. Can't have that.

Faced with a Democratic Congress,  Bush—who vetoed nothing during his first five and a half years in office—is now on the warpath. These and more to come and threats to veto something like a dozen more tend to slow things down. The Democratic-led House and some Republicans would like to get a few things going but unfortunately, the President hates Congress now that it doesn't rubber stamp his killing anything not in step with the James Dobson and K-Steet lobbyist wings. This stuff doesn't get far because of the GOP's filibusters and threats. Congress is stuck because the GOP is stuck with Bush and the only thing the GOP can now do for power.....it has to show its power or else.... is to stifle progress for the American people on these key issues. All it takes is a word or two stuck in a bill to kill it.

Anyway Bush opposes or has threatened to veto 60 percent of the House's work. It's a waste of time while enough neocons block everything not useful in the coming elections.

He seems oblivious to the fact that he is certainly going to be remembered as one of if not the worst President in history. The GOP has a lot to thank him for as well. Bush has driven a stake through its heart for some time to come....I guess it's not all bad.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 16^th, 2008 at 5:08pm:

What has Bush vetoed: It's more his threats than vetoes that make our beloved supremely elected President so popular. Bush's veto of SCHIP (Expansion of health care for children) comes to mind, which 81 percent of the public supports.   The farm bill with all its flaws contained something like ten billion dollars for nutrition programs---food stamps. Can't have that. Faced with a Democratic Congress,  Bush—who vetoed nothing during his first five and a half years in office—is now on the warpath. These and more to come and threats to veto something like a dozen more tend to slow things down. The Democratic-led House and some Republicans would like to get a few things going but unfortunately, the President hates Congress now that it doesn't rubber stamp his killing anything not in step with the James Dobson and K-Steet lobbyist wings. This stuff doesn't get far because of the GOP's filibusters and threats. Congress is stuck because the GOP is stuck with Bush and the only thing the GOP can now do for power.....it has to show its power or else.... is to stifle progress for the American people on these key issues. All it takes is a word or two stuck in a bill to kill it. Anyway Bush opposes or has threatened to veto 60 percent of the House's work. It's a waste of time while enough neocons block everything not useful in the coming elections. He seems oblivious to the fact that he is certainly going to be remembered as one of if not the worst President in history. The GOP has a lot to thank him for as well. Bush has driven a stake through its heart for some time to come....I guess it's not all bad. Charlie

The president can veto anything he wants, but Congress can override a presidential veto if they have enough votes.  If 81% of the public supported legislation and those people actually talked to their congressmen, then the measure would have passed.  People weren't concerned enough to demand their congressmen pass the measure, therefore the measure didn't pass.  Ultimately, it was the people's fault.    

The problem with voting in flawed legislation is that all the flaws become law, too.  I'd rather congress do nothing than to make things worse than they are.  Too bad they don't feel the same way.

There needs to be a lot more common sense and a much tighter control of the purse strings of the welfare system in this country.  I've got no problem with taking care of people who legitimately NEED the help.  I have a hard time paying strong healthy men to lay about and baby machines to pump out more kids to suck of the government tit.  There are people around here paying $40 or $50 bucks on their $350 or $400 rental units when there are other able-bodied adults living in the house that are not working.  There's a lot of work the city/state pay people to do that could be being done by these layabouts.  

The GOP sucks.  The Dems suck.  They all suck.  We have to vote for the ones that suck the least.  As I said before, it's time to drop party alliances.  Study the issues and where the candidates stand on what's important to you and vote your values.  

There is a somewhat appealing theory that every bill should require a two-thirds majority. The idea being that if 33-1/3 percent of a legislature dislikes it; it probably isn't very good. It no doubt comes from a libertarian end which as I say: Can be appealing. I don't think we would like this place if it were so arbitrary however.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 16^th, 2008 at 6:03pm:

There is a somewhat appealing theory that every bill should require a two-thirds majority. Yeah I know.  A little over two years ago, Republicans couldn't pass gas without a filibuster from the left.  They are all playing a childish game of tit for tat.  It was wrong and ridiculous then, it is just as wrong and ridiculous now. The idea being that if 33-1/3 percent of a legislature dislikes it; it probably isn't very good. It no doubt comes from a libertarian end which as I say: Can be appealing. I don't think we would like this place if it were so arbitrary however. Charlie

Now wait, before 81% of the population approved a certain legislation and it being potentially vetoed was a bad thing.  Now we wouldn't like this place if the majority ruled?  Is that because you know that if the majority were listened to, the trend towards liberalism would be stopped or seriously slowed down?  So basically, no matter how many of the American people want a particular piece of legislation to pass, if it doesn't meet the socialist agenda, then the idea is bad.  

People talk about high ideals and a better world when they are surrounded by large groups of like talking people, but I really believe that if you stood every person up individually, stripped all the pie in the sky utopia crap away and asked them point blank what they wanted for themselves, their children and their children's children, most would line up just right of center.  

Liberalism is like a cancer destroying this country from the inside out.  We ignore the smell of death because we want to believe that the lie that one more social program will make this a better world.  If we pay just a little more in taxes, everything will be alright.  Throw more money at the problems and they will vanish.  The biggest problem in this country can't be solved with money, because the biggest problem we have is apathy.  The people are abdicating more and more of their freedoms to the government and government never stops taking and never stops growing willingly.  Every new law and every new social program is another link in the chains that bind us into servitude and guarantees the destruction of this country.  


As to online/e-mail polls and petitions...online and e-mail polls and petitions are called "Slacktivism."  They give the participant a good feeling about him or herself for "helping" without actually having to expend any effort.  Congress pays no little to no attention to them.  If you want to get a congressman's ear, hit him where he lives - in the vote.  Send him a letter telling him that if he does not start towing the line (and spelling out where that line is), you will vote him out next election and then get your friends and others to do the same thing.  If enough people do this, things will change.

Posted by: Gator Posted on: Yesterday at 5:53pm

Quote:

There needs to be a lot more common sense and a much tighter control of the purse strings of the welfare system in this country.  I've got no problem with taking care of people who legitimately NEED the help.

MI did a lot of welfare reform in the 90's.  I believe state governors have much more control now for their states.



Quote:

In 1991 Governor Engler (MI) eliminated General Assistance, a state cash-assistance program... This action did not require federal approval. In 1992 President Clinton vowed to "end welfare as we know it." Governors found federal welfare laws/regulations overly prescriptive; most would opt for more flexibility, even if it meant less federal funding. In 1996 President Clinton kept his promise by signing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). Responsibility for welfare had devolved to the states. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

December 6, 1995 Governor Engler Signs Welfare Reform Bills Michigan Governor John Engler today signed welfare reform legislation putting in place the first and most sweeping welfare reforms in the nation to implement federal block grants. "With this legislation, Michigan becomes the first state in the nation ready to move forward to implement innovative work-based reforms to move even more people from the welfare rolls to private payrolls," said Governor Engler. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Published: January 22, 1996 Mr. Engler's plan may change the shape of the welfare debate because many governors, increasingly expected to design their own programs, are looking for guidance. Michigan, Wisconsin and Massachusetts are at the forefront of the search to make welfare programs less costly by finding jobs for those without work. The Michigan plan, which takes effect on April 1, is called Project Zero because its aim is to reduce unemployment to zero among welfare recipients. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Although I don't have a report card on how it's working out.

What kills me is that true conservatives dislike him almost as intensely, but for all the opposite reasons.

I am not sure what th alternatives that will make a difference quickly, but I signed.

It would seem that it would be great for car dealers to develop new types of hybrids or whatever, but they will all be too expensive for the typical middle class family to buy.  

Quote:

Liberalism is like a cancer destroying this country from the inside out.[/size]

Oh really? If liberalism a cancer it's the slowest moving one there is and seems to go into remission for a time after regular conservative cash injections.

It took this country 130 years to find its way towards any serious federal regulations....under a Republican. It took another 30 for the New Deal, which until now, has kept this a pretty nice place to hang--despite the relentless Republican attempts to kill off the few remainng pieces. Since the deregulation zeal of the 1980s, any progress has gotten more and more top heavy. Few big businesses have an interest in self-regulation. Real workers wages, pensions, and medical insurance have gone down, disappeared, or become harder to find or use. That when business treats its workers and customers fairly....those fabulous fifties are the best example.....makes for a better country in every way, seems of little interest.

Dubya & Co. have clearly shown just how important it is to throw a bone to us now and then. If they had, they still might be running Congress. The country has usually been center-left but that edge has too often been countered with money bins full of cash by by unpatriotic people who don't like the people in their own country.

Americans don't have a centrist party and every time one looks like it might take hold, it's treated like a party of treasonists and or banned from debates. Something un-American about that.

Charlie

And we will never be able to "fix" our government until the voters on both sides pull their heads out of the sand and realize that they are being played by the "two" major parties.  They sit back, make sound bites about fixing things, and just make them worse, the only thing they are able to do effectively is to line the coiffers of their supporters with our tax dollars.  They're really good at that.  They will NEVER fix anything, if they started fixing things, then what could they campaign on?  Hmmmmmm....  Think about it, really think about it.  If you're able to.

Well said Thomas!

Jimmers

I agree with Thomas -- our government is broken and the "people" are the only ones who can fix it -- thru the VOTE.

It's about time people came to realize that. I'm hearing "We don't have a choice and I'll be damned if I"m going to vote this year!" To me this isn't an option - VOTE and THEN make sure those you voted for DO THE JOB YOU HIRED THEM TO DO!

Yes, before you vote, study what they stand for -ASK QUESTIONS - what are you planning to do? Then after they're elected - make sure they DO IT!

We've turned our country over to 535 men and women in DC and then we sit back and give lip service to how they're screwing up our lives, but what the devil are WE doing about it? We HIRED these people - it's up to US to see that they do what WE hired them to do, yet most people in this country don't even know WHO they hired to run the country. We've been programed to believe "Trust me - I know what's best for you!"

Then I hear, "I just don't want to get invovled!" Why the hell not? Do you not live in this country? Do you LIKE what's going on? Until the American People take back this country we're not going to see any changes made in Congress. But when people start sending the messages to Congress that "Enough is Enough!" then we'll see some changes, but it'll take the American public to do this. Now IS the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country..... While we still have a country to come to the aid of!

Hugs BD

And at the top of the "green" food chain we have dear old Al "I made green off of green" Gore.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I would like to know why Mr. Gore thinks it is ok for the rest of us to live in wikkiups, cook over a dung fire, eat roots and grubs and walk or ride a bike to save the planet while his carbon footprint is the size of Texas.  Guess he really dosn't care about global warming as long as he can turn a profit off of fear mongering.

What a hypocrite!  Unfucking believable!  And no, there is no such thing as "carbon neutral"  You either conserve or you don't.  I guess he really is liberal....about wasting energy!  LOL!

-P.

Paul98 wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 3:28pm:

And at the top of the "green" food chain we have dear old Al "I made green off of green" Gore. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE I would like to know why Mr. Gore thinks it is ok for the rest of us to live in wikkiups, cook over a dung fire, eat roots and grubs and walk or ride a bike to save the planet while his carbon footprint is the size of Texas.  Guess he really dosn't care about global warming as long as he can turn a profit off of fear mongering. What a hypocrite!  Unfucking believable!  And no, there is no such thing as "carbon neutral"  You either conserve or you don't.  I guess he really is liberal....about wasting energy!  LOL! -P.

Last year, after having all of his conventional energy-using systems removed and replaced with "green" alternatives, the energy consumption of his residence increased over 1100 kwh per month. He now uses just shy of 18,000 kwh per month, more than the average consumer uses in a year.

And he just gave his ringing endorsement to B. Hussein Obama (keep in mind that an Algore endorsement is, historically, a kiss of death).

Everyone needs to think about which horse they're going to hitch their cart to.

They are all hypocrites, Paul.  All of them.  

Paul98 wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 3:28pm:

And at the top of the "green" food chain we have dear old Al "I made green off of green" Gore. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE I would like to know why Mr. Gore thinks it is ok for the rest of us to live in wikkiups, cook over a dung fire, eat roots and grubs and walk or ride a bike to save the planet while his carbon footprint is the size of Texas.  Guess he really dosn't care about global warming as long as he can turn a profit off of fear mongering. What a hypocrite!  Unfucking believable!  And no, there is no such thing as "carbon neutral"  You either conserve or you don't.  I guess he really is liberal....about wasting energy!  LOL! -P.

He's running a business out of his home, and even if expansion of the business means reduced global energy consumption (debatable, but possible), it will generally mean more local consumption.  Dow-Corning uses a lot of energy to produce insulation, and I will be putting some of my stimulus check to help fuel their pink-stuff factory.  I will be consuming more energy in order to consume less energy.

Barbara, you said it!  It is high time we tell them they work for us, and if they don't start doing the job right we need to FIRE them!

Jerry

Agostino Leyre wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 9:09am:

And we will never be able to "fix" our government until the voters on both sides pull their heads out of the sand and realize that they are being played by the "two" major parties.  They sit back, make sound bites about fixing things, and just make them worse, the only thing they are able to do effectively is to line the coiffers of their supporters with our tax dollars.  They're really good at that.  They will NEVER fix anything, if they started fixing things, then what could they campaign on?  Hmmmmmm....  Think about it, really think about it.  If you're able to.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Everyone should stop the video (if you have to) and read every written word that is shown on a black screen!

Quote:

And he just gave his ringing endorsement to B. Hussein Obama

I wondered how long it would take.

I agree with Gator & Co. about the bottom feeders in our Congress.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

I wondered how long it would take.

How long what would take? For someone to call him by his given name?

Quote:

How long what would take? For someone to call him by his given name?

Two in a row.

The GOP must is scraping the bottom. I had no idea they were in this much trouble. Not surprising tactic of course.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 10:43pm:

Quote: How long what would take? For someone to call him by his given name? Two in a row. The GOP must is scraping the bottom. I had no idea they were in this much trouble. Not surprising tactic of course. Charlie

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I see the Tennessee Center for Policy Research links up with all the biggest and best oil lobby think tanks in the D.C. area.  And president Drew Johnson learned from the best, serving as an "Institute for Humane Studies Koch Fellow."  The EPA has a little story about the Koch Industries, of brothers Charles G. Koch and David H. Koch, who love to contribute to these think tanks, and in fact funds every national one on the TCPR web site.  You really gotta watch out for those hypocrites.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Kevin_M wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:44am:

I see the Tennessee Center for Policy Research links up with all the biggest and best oil lobby think tanks in the D.C. area.  And president Drew Johnson learned from the best, serving as an "Institute for Humane Studies Koch Fellow."  The EPA has a little story about the Koch Industries, of brothers Charles G. Koch and David H. Koch, who love to contribute to these think tanks, and in fact funds every national one on the TCPR web site.  You really gotta watch out for those hypocrites. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

And some how Drew Johnsons backround or funding has bearing on Al's pontifications which are in direct conflict with his hypercarbon lifestyle?  I fail to see it lessening of Al's hypocracy which was the point of my post.  It was not the sainthood of Drews past.

-P.

wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 8:09pm:

Agostino Leyre wrote on Jun 18th, 2008 at 9:09am: And we will never be able to "fix" our government until the voters on both sides pull their heads out of the sand and realize that they are being played by the "two" major parties.  They sit back, make sound bites about fixing things, and just make them worse, the only thing they are able to do effectively is to line the coiffers of their supporters with our tax dollars.  They're really good at that.  They will NEVER fix anything, if they started fixing things, then what could they campaign on?  Hmmmmmm....  Think about it, really think about it.  If you're able to. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Everyone should stop the video (if you have to) and read every written word that is shown on a black screen!

This guy knows what's up.  The problem is that people are not mentally capable of seeing how they're being duped.  It's quite sad really.  I swallowed the party line for the Republicans for many years, finally started to realize they were all the same when Bush Sr. was in office and Clinton and GW have just confirmed it for me, so it's taken me about sixteen years to see the light, but I didn't have the luxury of some one pointing the way for me.  I've come to realize that america likes to have it's political opinions spoon fed to them by their media of choice.  We love to be told what to think, because that is sooooooo much easier than thinking for ourselves.  We're headed for something a lot worse than "big brother".  When I see the direction we're headed it scares the shit right outta me.

wrote on Jun 18^th, 2008 at 8:09pm:

Everyone should stop the video (if you have to) and read every written word that is shown on a black screen!

LOL.  Why didn't we have the Republicans to warn of the 'cult of personality' when Reagan was around? Why don't we see them objectively reviewing the record of Maggie Thatcher, instead of swooning when her name gets mentioned?

Now Democrats are excited about their candidate, and McCain is bland and uninspiring (except when he yells at kids to get the hell off his lawn). So it must be the end of the world?  Nah.  It's politics as usual - been that way through out the history of our nation.  

monty wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 9:24am:

It's politics as usual - been that way through out the history of our nation.

So that makes it ok, since that's always how it's been?  Just sit back and let the media and the one percent tell us who we can vote for?  

The influence of the media is over-rated. The media favored Hillary - she was ahead in the polls and considered the favorite, probably got more coverage.  The people were not convinced, and voted otherwise.

Dubya approval rating = 29.8%
Congress approval rating = 17.5%

But the Congress is an abstraction - a committee with so many faces that is faceless.  People hate Congress, but they love their Congressman.

I hate my Congresswoman - Lois Capps.  She acts soooo sweet it turns my stomach!

(I'm having trouble quoting a source of a post so far when there is a quote within the post, the wrong name appears.)



Quote:

I fail to see it lessening of Al's hypocracy which was the point of my post.

In all, it is a lot of energy use.  I simply widened the field of hypocrisy to include the source of the article.  

The opinionated use of data comes into question, so now articles simply have two opinions only making it a nice distraction by this fossil fuel influence, especially when they've been fined $30 million by the EPA and then pointing a finger at Al Gore.  

The truthfulness of stating his energy use increased 10% with the modifications installed is in question.  I find the article posted to be stating the fact of "the year since" to be deceptive, it has not been a year since the utilization of his modifications.



Quote:

The Associated Press reported on December 13, 2007 that Gore "has completed a host of improvements to make the home more energy efficient, and a building-industry group has praised the house as one of the nation's most environmentally friendly [...] 'Short of tearing it down and starting anew, I don't know how it could have been rated any higher,' said Kim Shinn of the non-profit U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design." Gore was criticized again in June 2008 after the TCPR audited his public utility bills from the Nashville Electric Service and found that the Gores consumed 10% more energy in the year since their home received its eco-friendly modifications.  According to the group, while the average American home consumes 11,040kWh per year, the Gore residence consumed an average of 17,768kWh per month from June 2007 to June 2008, a monthly increase of 1,638kWh from the previous year.[106] Gore's spokeswoman Kalee Kreider disputed the TCPR's findings and maintained that the Gores' "utility bills have gone down 40 percent since the green retrofit." Kreider also argued that "the three-year renovation on the home wasn't complete until November, so it's a bit early to attempt a before-and-after comparison. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Just as when big fossil fuel tried to ban his film in schools.


Quote:

Mining Magnate Funds Campaign to Black Out Gore FIlm in UK Schools Revealed: the man behind court attack on Gore film Fuel and mining magnate backed UK challenge to An Inconvenient Truth The Observer (UK), Oct. 14, 2007 The school governor who challenged the screening of Al Gore's climate change documentary in secondary schools was funded by a Scottish quarrying magnate who established a controversial lobbying group to attack environmentalists' claims about global warming. Records filed at the Electoral Commission show the New Party has received nearly all of its money - almost £1m between 2004 and 2006 - from Cloburn Quarry Limited, based in Lanarkshire.

Bought opinions.

monty wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 9:49am:

The influence of the media is over-rated. The media favored Hillary - she was ahead in the polls and considered the favorite, probably got more coverage.  The people were not convinced, and voted otherwise.

Over-rated, really?  So how many people that voted for Obama have sat down and discussed policy with him?  ZERO!  The only exposure they've had to him is through the media.

Agostino Leyre wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 11:59am:

monty wrote on Jun 19th, 2008 at 9:49am: The influence of the media is over-rated. The media favored Hillary - she was ahead in the polls and considered the favorite, probably got more coverage.  The people were not convinced, and voted otherwise.

I also do not believe the influence of the media is over-rated.  People are spoon fed their information.  
Look how many people think that sharing the same name as another person means anything at all.

Look how Obama is attacked for wanting to speak with Aquavelvejad, yet Bush Jr. just met with Saudi terrorists and begged them to pump more oil.  If Obama can't meet with terrorists, why can Bush Jr?

Look how some people are called anti-American when they say they would rather fight terrorism than fight for Iraqi freedom.  

Look how many people poo-poo welfare and poo-poo the lower tax rate for the top 2%, and then love the idea of getting a check from the government for a 'stimulus'.  People over 75k a year got much less, if anything.  

The US media owns 90%+ of the brains in America.  Politicians get richer and civilians get stupider.

   

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 1:23pm:

[quote author=3C2E3E28282F5B0 link=1212175157/75#90 date=1213891191] The US media owns 90%+ of the brains in America.  Politicians get richer and civilians get stupider.

Indeed.

People on the left sure are sensitive about that name thing. It's really quite stunning.

Quote:

Look how many people poo-poo welfare and poo-poo the lower tax rate for the top 2%

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Think you must have been influenced by the media.

I guess I didnt state my point well, Bob.   My point was that Bush Jr and the right wing media say that lower taxes on the rich mean more investment from them, thus resulting in more overall jobs or whatnot.

This economic stimulus welfare package was for people making 75k or less.  From 75k to 150k was a very small amount of welfare, over 150k was no welfare.

So, if lower taxes on the rich means more jobs and all that shit, howcome the welfare package excluded them?

A legislation proposal here is a kick in the butt for those who voluntarily take measures for conservation.  


Deposits on bottled water?

Group pushes to spread law to other nonrefundable containers littering state

BY TINA LAM - FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER - June 18, 2008

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

All quotes from this article.



Quote:

The Michigan United Conservation Clubs threw its considerable political weight Tuesday behind a plan to extend Michigan's first-in-the-nation bottle deposit law to containers for water, juice and tea bottles.

MI was apparently an initiator of the bottle deposit law and have had the ten cent return.  I find it a hassle so drink bottled water.



Quote:

The containers, especially pervasive plastic water bottles, have become a national hot-button issue as people have switched from sodas and coffee to bottled water. The bottles are controversial because they often end up in roadside litter and require petroleum for their production and delivery.

I remember the first Earth Day in high school and resolved to voluntarily stop littering at the time, and haven't since.  Voluntary efforts weren't enough, a ten cent bottle law was enacted in '76.



Quote:

Michiganders return 97% of their beer and soda cans and bottles, which are subject to a 10-cent deposit, but they throw away 80% of other beverage bottles, which have no deposit.

Since 1990, when our city started a recycling program, I've always recycled glass, metal, paper, and plastic.  



Quote:

Only 10 other states have bottle deposits; no states surrounding Michigan have them.

Returning bottles from other states for a dime seems a problem, I see added costs coming.



Quote:

MUCC's own polling shows 75% of Michigan voters support the change, he said.

I buy bottled water cases when it's on sale.  Returning them all would really suck.  Who in the heck would want to lug them all back to the store as opposed to gathering in a receptacle and putting them in a recycling bin out by the curb??????



Quote:

Each machine that scans returnables costs $20,000

Inserting each plastic bottle separately into a machine sucks, too.



Quote:

Although there currently is a backlash against bottled water, with cities such as Ann Arbor banning it at meetings and in offices,... If the legislative plan doesn't fly, a future statewide ballot initiative is possible, said James Clift, policy director of the Michigan Environmental Council. "I think it would pass easily," he said.

I cannot believe bottled water is banned from the workplace!

Those who DO recycle are being penalized.  Pisses me off.  

This also hints to me that perhaps voluntary efforts of energy conservation will not be sufficient and the possibility of legislation will result in further inconveniences to all and the many who are making the effort.  

wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 1:46pm:

People on the left sure are sensitive about that name thing. It's really quite stunning.

Dude, do you know how many serial killers and baby rapists are named Bill?  
To try to draw a connection between you and other people named Bill is not just elementary, it's preschool.

If you think there is a connection between people who share a name, howcome you never try to draw a connection between George H. Walker Bush, Jr and John Walker Lindh?  What about George Galloway, the child rapist?  Is there a connection between the 2 since their names are both George?

Agostino Leyre wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 11:59am:

monty wrote on Jun 19th, 2008 at 9:49am: The influence of the media is over-rated. The media favored Hillary - she was ahead in the polls and considered the favorite, probably got more coverage.  The people were not convinced, and voted otherwise. Over-rated, really?  So how many people that voted for Obama have sat down and discussed policy with him?  ZERO!  The only exposure they've had to him is through the media.

Well, I have met exactly one presidential candidate, and I was too young to sit him down and wonk policy with him even if he hadn't had a rather full schedule.  On the other hand, I do think that a person that reads newspapers, magazines, or a wide variety of sources on the internet CAN figure out where the candidates stand on tax policy, Iraq, healthcare, and any other issue that is of interest.  With the internet, the traditional media is getting less powerful, not more.

A while back, there was a posting here about a site that had people answer a series of questions, and it then showed which candidates best represent their views, and which candidates are least like them.  Millions of people have used sites like that.  An even larger group does their homework in other ways.  Give America some credit.

The more you make, the higher the percentage of your income goes to taxes.  That's called a progressive tax system and is one of the planks of the socialist platform.

It's not enough to be level across the board.  At, say, 10% across the board, the "rich" would still pay many times more than the "poor" but it would be fair.

Example:  I make $100 a week, I would pay $10 a week in taxes.  You make $1000 a week, you pay $100 a week in taxes.  That's fair enough, because we both pay the same percentage of our income.  But that isn't the way it is.

For every $100 in income, the lowest rate pays $3.21 in taxes.  The highest rate pays $21.40 in taxes on that same $100.  How is that fair?

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:08pm:

wrote on Jun 19th, 2008 at 1:46pm: People on the left sure are sensitive about that name thing. It's really quite stunning. Dude, do you know how many serial killers and baby rapists are named Bill?   To try to draw a connection between you and other people named Bill is not just elementary, it's preschool. If you think there is a connection between people who share a name, howcome you never try to draw a connection between George H. Walker Bush, Jr and John Walker Lindh?  What about George Galloway, the child rapist?  Is there a connection between the 2 since their names are both George?

Dude, you're making my point for me.

How about a response, Bill?  

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:24pm:

How about a response, Bill?

How about this?

I appreciate your somewhat absurd examples, but I fail to see why my mentioning Barack Hussein Obama's full name should be something that causes his supporters to become so defensive. His middle name doesn't bother me, why should it bother them? It's almost as if he has achieved the level of "He Whose Name Must Not Be Spoken."

I know he's the Messiah to some, but this is becoming a little ridiculous, don't you think?

Bob P wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 1:47pm:

Quote: Look how many people poo-poo welfare and poo-poo the lower tax rate for the top 2% START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Think you must have been influenced by the media.

How about a chart that shows the percent of income that goes to taxes, not total taxes paid.  

monty wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:11pm:

On the other hand, I do think that a person that reads newspapers, magazines, or a wide variety of sources on the internet CAN figure out where the candidates stand on tax policy, Iraq, healthcare, and any other issue that is of interest.

Well, if you think that any of the main party candidates actually have a stand on any issue besides keeping the balance of power right were it is, then it's pointless for the two of us to continue the conversation.  

I do give America some credit there are a few critical thinking civilians left and the independant parties are gaining strenght in local areas.  It will just take time to demolish the republicrat juggernaut that has enslaved the working class of this country for the last fifty years.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:01pm:

I guess I didnt state my point well, Bob.   My point was that Bush Jr and the right wing media say that lower taxes on the rich mean more investment from them, thus resulting in more overall jobs or whatnot. This economic stimulus welfare package was for people making 75k or less.  From 75k to 150k was a very small amount of welfare, over 150k was no welfare. So, if lower taxes on the rich means more jobs and all that shit, howcome the welfare package excluded them?

Wealth envy.  Pure and simple  Congress knew that if they enacted a fair and equitable system, the "poor" voters would pitch a bi+ch and their seats would be in jeopardy.

Bro, you hit the nail on the head.  It is ridiculous.  You know the only reason you say his middle name is because he shares the same name as a murderer.  I don't see why you do this and then say I am absurd because you share the same name as other murderers.  

I am not getting defensive, I didn't even vote for Obama.  He has a shitload of 'no votes' in his short history as politician.  However, I do like his voting record for things he has voted on, with the exception of the energy bills.  I'd say I might agree with him on 50% of his votes or more.  

I'm not sure about the messiah, but I do know playing the name game after age 8 is ridiculous.  I certainly wouldn't expect that from you.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 3:14pm:

I'm not sure about the messiah, but I do know playing the name game after age 8 is ridiculous.

Banana-fanna Ehud-Barak-Manna ...  Anna!

I think its funny that Barack/Barak is the name of Israel's Defense Minister.  Obama's name is a Semitic festival!!

Wikipedia does not mention his mother's name ... WTF?  What is the media trying to hide??  Why won't they mention her name??  Why won't they release her (real) birth certificate??  That would clear up this whole cloud I created.  

It amazes me how worked up some will get over the most insignificant stuff.

Just to be fair, from now on, on this thread only, I will call his opponent by his full name: John Sidney McCain III (who happens to share the same first name as John Wayne Gacey, and the same middle name as Sydney Ellen Wade's first name, the girlfriend of the POTUS in the movie The American President) - albeit an alternate spelling.

Fair enough?

Hey Paul.  In truth, what honestly irked me about the article was that president Drew Johnson used the information to do some emotional instilling with name-calling, like fraud and hypocrite.  Gore flies around the country giving speeches, his footprint is unmistakably huge.
 The overriding purpose also of the article I saw was in these sentences:


Quote:

Gore’s personal electricity consumption up 10%, despite "energy-efficient" home renovations Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the "green" overhaul.

This says that with all the latest "alternative energy" ideas, Gore increased his energy consumption, which would make some think the whole idea of alternative energy is a bunch of bunk also.  Suspiciously this sounds like fossil fuel talking, inferring that not only is Gore bunk, green is bunk, and the ideas of getting away from fossil fuels is bunk, too.  Just my opinion.

Weird, messages in articles can hit different people different ways, however, there is an oily footprint in the shadow of the message.
 

If he was truly concerned about conserving energy (and how ironic would that be? a liberal being conservative), he would give his speeches over the internet. He knows it can be done - he invented it.

I'm willing to bet that his increased energy consumption is due to the addition of high-intensity lights in his trophy cabinets. He's earned an awful lot of them lately.

wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 4:28pm:

If he was truly concerned about conserving energy (and how ironic would that be? a liberal being conservative), he would give his speeches over the internet. He knows it can be done - he invented it.

Now that there is right funny, I don't care who you are!  ;D

It's hard for me to say how effective internet versus live presentations are.  But if an energy conscious band only played on the internet for free downloads and never traveled for live performances, would it be the same?

Just reaching for a familiar ground perspective from you about something I don't know.

Agostino Leyre wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 2:59pm:

Well, if you think that any of the main party candidates actually have a stand on any issue besides keeping the balance of power right were it is, then it's pointless for the two of us to continue the conversation.

Yes, I do think that there are differences between the candidates - in terms of taxes, in terms of appointments to the Supreme Court, in terms of health care, in terms of energy priorities and policies.

To a Libertarian or Marxist-Leninist or Green party member, both the Democratic and Republican parties are the same; they don't value and protect freedom, they don't really fight for the worker, and they aren't  going all-out for the environment.  Putting aside the parties that currently don't have a chance, focusing only on the two main choices that are there, I do see significant differences. Progress is slow, people do often get side-tracked or corrupted, but change can and does happen.

Maybe we are too far apart to talk about it any more.  Ok. I gotta finish these reports. Maybe another day, another topic.

Quote:

How about a chart that shows the percent of income that goes to taxes, not total taxes paid.

It's there Thomas, on the right side of the chart.  The top 1% of wage earners pay 38% of the taxes collected.

There's the difference between Al and me - I'm not a hypocrite about it. I proudly consume gas, oil, electricity, natural gas. Most of the time that I play, I'm donating my time and talent (what little there is of it) for a greater good, like looking for a cure for lupus, getting an autistic girl a guide dog, or trying to get a little kid a kidney that works. But I have to spend some carbon credits to do it. At least I admit it.

Bob P wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 4:56pm:

Quote: How about a chart that shows the percent of income that goes to taxes, not total taxes paid. It's there Thomas, on the right side of the chart.  The top 1% of wage earners pay 38% of the taxes collected.

You're not getting what I'm saying, how much of their income goes towards taxes, as in the percentage of the money they make, not the percentage of taxes.

Thomas, that's in the middle of the chart.  The top 1% pays 21.4% of their income in taxes.  The lowest tax bracket pays 3.1%.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I guess it was more of a hypothetical question, if there was an energy conscious band, would it be practical to not play live, do shows by internet, maybe even for causes.

I don't know what Al admits about personal lifestyle, he'd be aware jets are burn a bunch.  

In your case, presence for good causes puts you there, in person, meaningfully.   :)

Kevin_M wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 5:14pm:

I guess it was more of a hypothetical question, if there was an energy conscious band, would it be practical to not play live, do shows by internet, maybe even for causes.

Steely Dan? ;D

wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 5:14pm:

Thomas, that's in the middle of the chart.  The top 1% pays 21.4% of their income in taxes.  The lowest tax bracket pays 3.1%.

Don't be fooled by the title of that middle column - that's average tax rate paid in INCOME taxes. It doesn't include all the other taxes that people pay (sales, gas, property, wheel, etc.)

So far over a million people have signed the petition! :)

Perhaps congress will smarten up when people cant afford to eat.  Food was becoming a problem with cost and availability and that was before the mid-west flooding.  It is going to get very expensive come Aug folks!  The resurve grain supplies the USA usally have on hand are basically gone.

-P.

Paul98 wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 8:08pm:

Perhaps congress will smarten up when people cant afford to eat.

Or perhaps some of us will actually live to experience the 2nd American Revolution.

Whats in a name when you can show that you have no idea WTF your doing when it comes to foriegn policy............in public! ;)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Someone has our back!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

The Democrats and Republicans waste our tax dollars equally. The only difference is that the Democrats like it more.

Should ether Party stumble upon a great idea, the other Party would reject it no matter how much sense it made. It is maddening to watch.

Tea overboard.  Hey, I got an idea.  Let's all just not pay our Taxes for a year.  No...that wont work...they take their cut out of our earnings before we even deposit what's left.  Pretty slick huh?

Steve G (I)

Oh..by the way, I'm OK with drilling off of my coast and we have room for another refinery too.

wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 8:54pm:

Whats in a name when you can show that you have no idea WTF your doing when it comes to foriegn policy............in public! ;) START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Bogus.

Afghanis don't speak much arabic, but the foreign fighters there (including bin Laden and friends) do think and communicate in Arabic, not Pashto.  There are US translators who specialize in Arabic in Afghanistan. Even more importantly, the FBI, CIA and NSA are sitting on piles of Arabic documents from Al Qaeda that are untranslated.  The war in Iraq has created a competition for scarce (trusted) translators - do we use them to figure out Iraq and protect the troops, or do we use them to analyze Al Qaeda and protect the homeland from another 9-11??  Or do we try to do both, but do neither one that well?

While oil is Iraq's main export, we are sending agricultural advisors to that country.  
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE
Your blogwriter's argument that Afghanistan cant have agricultural development without refrigeration (which requires electricity) is ridiculous. We have development programs for dozens of other countries that don't require electricity - if fresh fruits spoil before getting them to market, produce dried fruit using solar dryers, etc.  

Obama was far closer to the truth than the liveleak op-ed. Translation and key intelligence operations are being run with that famous Katrina-style school of management.


Quote:

The lack of Arabic translators in Iraq appears to stem from a Bush Administration decision to outsource translation services to private contractors. Called "linguistic support," these companies, two of the largest of which are Titan Corporation and DynCorp International, have received billions of dollars to provide language interpreters to the Iraq reconstruction effort. But many of the supposed "translators" sent to Iraq were untrained, had poor language skills, or couldn't speak Arabic at all. In many cases the contractors appear to have conducted no screenings or interviews with prospective translators. And Titan Corporation interpreters are accused of involvement in two cases of prisoner abuse in Iraq and one case of espionage at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

stevegeebe wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 10:17pm:

The Democrats and Republicans waste our tax dollars equally. The only difference is that the Democrats like it more. Should ether Party stumble upon a great idea, the other Party would reject it no matter how much sense it made. It is maddening to watch. Tea overboard.  Hey, I got an idea.  Let's all just not pay our Taxes for a year.  No...that wont work...they take their cut out of our earnings before we even deposit what's left.  Pretty slick huh? Steve G (I) Oh..by the way, I'm OK with drilling off of my coast and we have room for another refinery too.

Im with you, Steve!  [smiley=headbanger.gif]

Are you with us, Flo/Monty?  ;)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

I won't add to this debate but ....I do have a question.


 
Quote:

It doesn't include all the other taxes that people pay (sales, gas, property, wheel, etc.)

   "Wheel"   ?

Linda_Howell wrote on Jun 19^th, 2008 at 11:23pm:

I won't add to this debate but ....I do have a question.   Quote: It doesn't include all the other taxes that people pay (sales, gas, property, wheel, etc.)    "Wheel"   ?

Some states have a wheel tax - it's a tax paid on the sale of tires over and above the state sales tax. Goes toward maintaining the roads. Other states have simply rolled it into vehicle registration fees.

Thanks for clearing that one up -- I was wondering too Linda? Never heard of a 'wheel" tax...

Hugs BD

A wheel tax.........I never heard of that one either. It's surprising here in New York. There is probably a toothpick consumption levy. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I'm proud of myself. I haven't turned on TV news yet. So far, it's a beautiful day. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie wrote on Jun 20^th, 2008 at 10:50am:

A wheel tax.........I never heard of that one either. It's surprising here in New York. There is probably a toothpick consumption levy. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE I'm proud of myself. I haven't turned on TV news yet. So far, it's a beautiful day. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Charlie START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Love the smilies Charlie!  Be cheerful as it is a levy and not a tax! ;)  I love the symantics the pols use.  Fee, levy, surcharge....but it is NOT a tax!  LOL.

Yea, all tires in the USA carry an excise tax and the state plops on another tax on top of that.  Tires are a hugh money maker for the fed and state.  So is gas.

-P.

A little different form than I'm used to, but the concept is the same:

Wheel Tax
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A wheel tax is a method of taxation commonly used in the United States by cities and counties. The problem that a wheel tax attempts to solve is that many people come into a community from outside to work - using the communities roads, water, sewer, and so forth, but pay no taxes into the community as a result of living outside of the municipality.

The tax is charged to motorists based upon the number of wheels their vehicles have, often collected at the time of vehicle registration or tag renewals.

Thanks kids. I guess ya never get a break.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

Price of filling the tank got ya down?  Here's a little pick-me-up. :)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

-P.

Americas #1 funniest home video!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Go ahead, click on it, you know you want to!  ;)

Its an old video.  :)

wrote on Jun 20^th, 2008 at 10:59am:

A little different form than I'm used to, but the concept is the same: Wheel Tax From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A wheel tax is a method of taxation commonly used in the United States by cities and counties. The problem that a wheel tax attempts to solve is that many people come into a community from outside to work - using the communities roads, water, sewer, and so forth, but pay no taxes into the community as a result of living outside of the municipality. The tax is charged to motorists based upon the number of wheels their vehicles have, often collected at the time of vehicle registration or tag renewals.

This is, in addition of course, to the taxes paid for the fuel which is to go to streets and roads?  

That definition seems like a bunch of double speak to get more taxes.  Why would a congested area not collect tax revenue, so you have to tax wheels?

So how are your roads in W'Monee?

We don't have a wheel tax. And our roads suck.

More comedy  ;)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE