The President signed the shiny new Energy Bill today. (Applause...)
I guess it is a pretty good bill. It doesn't go quite far enough for me, and the President himself said that it will not solve our energy problems overnight, but it has been signed now, so I guess it's what we get.
In some ways I think that it more apropriately should have been called the "Energy and Government Pork" bill. From my understanding it is roughly 52% energy and 48% pork, but in this age of compromise, I guess you get your bills passed however you can.
On the Energy side of the bill, we get Government funding for research into a whole mess of alternative energy sources, with the idea of cutting our dependence on foreign oil. Wind power, hydrogen fuel cell technology, tax breaks for the rich who drive hybrid cars, etc...
We also get another month of Daylight Savings time, which will screw up my VCR, and Tivo, and coffee maker, and calculator, and computer clock, and wristwatch. Thanks a bunch...
One alternative energy source that is conspicuously missing from the new Energy bill is...
OIL FROM ANWAR.
I understand that we should not rape and plunder every undisturbed corner of God's creation, but it makes no sense to me why some people in this country would rather continue in our un-holy alliance with the creepy Saudi Arabian Royal family, and remain at the mercy of countries like Kuwait and Iran, rather than drill in a pristine, beautiful, desolate wasteland that no one has ever, nor will ever look at and enjoy, to get oil that already belongs to the United States. We don't have to buy it from anyone. (Except Haliburton...) It already belongs to us.
I understand why it is not in the bill, (because the bill would have been filibustered if it contained any mention of ANWAR) I just don't understand WHY it would have been filibustered.
I mean, take a poll of all of the taxpaying residents of the ANWAR preserve and ask if it's alright with them if we drill there. I'll bet you wouldn't get a single "no" vote.
If anybody lived there, (which they don't,) drilling there would create jobs. (Not much industry there right now...)
As beautiful and breathtaking as this place is, I don't know anyone who plans to take their next vacation there. Tourism is not a big thing in ANWAR.
Besides that, with the EPA regulations in place that apply to oil drilling, I doubt that even the caribou would notice that the oil rig is even there. It isn't going to ruin anything.
So now, the only explaination that I am left with for the objections to drilling in ANWAR is that the opponents of President Bush want to scream for him to solve the "Dependence on Foreign Oil" problem, and then deny him the means to solve it, so that they can then point out his failure to solve the problem.
Or maybe the President left it out of this Energy bill so that he can adress it in another (filibuster-proof) way, later on.
I guess I'll just have to wait and see...
Until then, I guess I will have to either save up a down payment for one of those new 4 1/2 horse Briggs powered hybrids, or enjoy the priviledge of paying record, historic prices at the gas pumps.
Yee-hah!
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Every Decision You Make In Life Boils Down To These Three Questions..... What Do You Want? What Does It Cost? Can You Afford It?
About Me
- tugboatcapn
- Reformed Truck Driver, Family Man and Recreational Political Commentator. I love a good argument, so if you argue with me, you had better have one.
Links
- The Beacon
- Commoncents
- The Truth From Iraq
- New Wineskins
- Goldfish Memories
- Hunker Down
- Casting Pearls Before Swine
- Daddio's Dark Side
- Pastor Timothy
- Jedi Master Rob
- Truth-Pain
- Mike's America
- Onecosmos
- Pearls and Lodestones
- The Barnyard
- Speak Southern Thar?
- Stop the Republicans
- Important Stuff -- Or not
Blog Archive
-
▼
2005
(86)
-
▼
August
(15)
- Faith Based Initiatives and the Baptist Men's Disa...
- Tug's Plan For Conserving Fuel.
- What's Wrong With McCain?
- Disclaimer?...Retraction?...Explaination. There we...
- Democrats And The People Who Love Them...
- Tug's Latest Post.
- Football, Birthdays, Marriage and Other Such.
- Cindy Sheehan, Go Away.
- Life Is Good...
- Is there ANYONE ELSE? PLEASE?? ANYONE??
- Energize Me!
- You Think This Is Funny?!? Well, Do You?!?
- "Or Prohibiting The Free Expression Thereof..."
- The "Race Card"...
- Side-Stepping The Real Issues...
-
▼
August
(15)
19 comments:
Well in politics, as far as I know, it's always been about compromise and attaching your rider to somebody else's bill to make sure that the (for instance) insurance companies in your home state get their god-given slice of the pie.
Nice to see that, for the first time since Carter, that there's gonna be funding for fuel sources other than oil. I agree that being in bed with the Saudis means nothing but trouble for us.
As to ANWAR-I sort of live near Alaska, as you know, and know a lot of people from there. It doesn't sound like the not-very-many people who live up there suffer for work. You have fishing, the existing oil industry and tourism...ANWAR just sounds like another one of those last-of-its-type places, and probably shouldn't be messed with...But I'm not speaking out of a place of knowledge here. I don't know.
Is this the Energy Bill that hands all those oil companies in Delays district billions of dollars for free, to do what they should be doing on their own?
You don't really believe Bush wants to end dependence on foreign oil do you? Who do you think has made his career? The Saudi's. The Saudis have made the Bush family rich, why would he bite the hand that feeds him? He makes 10x the amount of money off the Saudis as he does being president.
And by the way very few oil companies actually see ANWR as being profitable, and there is really only enough oil up there to last the US about a year and a half. So why bother, it would also be several years before we could even get to that oil and by that time, with all the money we are giving to the oil companies, they should be able to tap into alternative resources.
The thing that pisses me off, as an Oklahoman, is when peole here "oil company" they think Texaco or Shell or whatefver, when asround here, it's mostly Bob and Jack's Operating Co.
Fact is, if it's good for the energy sector, it's good for Oklahoma. Period.
Toad seems to be of the all-lefty-all-the-time variety of armchair politico. And that's really no more useful that Tom Delay's righty brand of BS.
Typos galore in my last post. So sorry!
Hey Toad, pick an argument. He was either "selected, not elected" or the Saudi Government is responsible. Which is it? He was rich before he became President, do we really have any proof that he is rich because of the Saudi royal family?
But all that aside, the estimates I have seen about the amount of oil in ANWAR far exceeds what you quoted in your post. If you have a source for that information I would be very happy if you would share it...
ER, The difference between you and Toad is monumental. I not only do not put the two of you in the same ball park, you are not even in the same SPORT. YOU actually have a brain, and can understand logic. He is a typical Kool-ade drinking liberal robot. (A very effective information gathering robot, but a robot just the same.)
I have been all over Texas and Oklahoma, and I understand that the Energy Business consists of a hundred dozen "Mom and Pop" operations, as does all industry in America, with the occaisional exception of a mega-corporation like Exxon or Wal-mart. When you make policy designed to hurt a big company, you KILL the small ones.
The truth is that NOBODY really knows how much oil there is in ANWAR, and nobody will ever know until we get up in there and drill for it, and see.
Another issue that I didn't address in my post is the Gulf of Mexico.
I look at the Gulf of Mexico every day, and it is VERY beautiful. But every time I look out across it, I think about how much more beautiful it would be with an oil rig or two out there in it.
Until the Dems are ready to let us go and get the oil that we have domestically, I don't want to hear anything they have to say about our dependence on foreign oil, or the energy crisis.
MY prioities are in the right place.
"...objections to drilling in ANWAR is that the opponents of President Bush want to scream for him to solve the "Dependence on Foreign Oil" problem, and then deny him the means to solve it, so that they can then point out his failure to solve the problem."
I'd say you nailed it there, friend.
And what did you do to attract the Bush haters? Sheeeeeesh
Hey, Br(lose)r,
I'm a Dem! Hahahahahahahaha!
Stupid b------! Y'all keep on and the Dems will have permannent minority status. Actually, I think we're there already. Whigs! Dems are just a bunch of arrogant, blind Whigs!
What gets me is this:
Republicans have both houses of Congress and the White House, yet act like they're ont he ropes, ficing to go down! Almost desperate sometimes. I don't get it.
Dems are as out of power -- real day-to-day power -- nationally as a rundown flashlight, yet act like they're the ones running the show! I don't get thst either.
I think I'll re-register as a Blue Moose Neo-Dixiecrat.
Y'all're all crazy. :-)
We don’t need to reduce dependence of foreign oil; we need to reduce dependence on oil.
Xena:
Best estimates are that there is 10 billion barrels of oil in ANWR which could be accessed somewhere around 2017 or after. Currently the US consumes 7 billion barrels of oil per year, by 2017 it would be considerably more if we haven't already switched ethanol, hydrogen or everyone starts driving hybrids.
So today ANWR represents less than a year and a half’s supply of oil on its own. And you also have to figure that it would cost twice as much to access that oil as it does from the gulf or some place such as that.
Yes Bush was rich before he became President that was my point, how do you think these guys got that way? Who baled Georgie out of all his failed business ventures?
Oh and for ER and everyone else I have a homework assignment for you. Check to see who in this energy bill is getting these grants and subsidies. I can guarantee, as with all federal subsidies they don't find their way to the Ma and Pa's of the world. Those types of companies simply don't have the political clout and lobbyist that the Exxon’s and Phillips have; if you can't afford lobbyist, you won’t get the subsidies.
As far as the robot comment is concerned ever hear the one about the pot and the kettle?
Name any political issue and I guarantee that I can predict your exact stance on the subject.
Toad is actually anti-business, I think. I'm not. I'm for all of 'em. But I'm for labor, too. Fact is, there would be no business with laborers, and no laborers without business.
So, again, I don't CARE who gets the subsidies IF it helps the economy in general, which I'm pretty sure it will, at least in the oil patch, which is where I live. There ain't no damn oil company employees without oil companies.
Tug, this is another example -- the main one, actually -- of where the left wing of my party and myself are so far apart, I seem like a Republican. And I don't mind that at all -- 'cause it ain't ME that's moved, it's the freaks in charge of my party.
Let it rot, and may the carcass fertilize a new mocerate-liberal party -- disaffected liberal Repubs welcome -- in its place.
Yep, toad, and I can predict with just as much accuracy where YOU will fall on any issue.
I will be on the right side, and you will be on the other side.
ER, the mainstream republicans of today are, for the most part, the moderate Democrats of thirty to fifty years ago.
JFK's economic policies more closley resembled Ronald Reagan's (Boo!! Hiss!!)than Clinton's or Carter's.
Just look at Bruiser and Toad. Even if they were ever right, I cannot align myself with people who are so driven by hatred and hostility.
You are welcome over here with us, ER...No need to feel all displaced-like...
Re, "the mainstream republicans of today are, for the most part, the moderate Democrats of thirty to fifty years ago."
Maybe. But they're not the ones in charge of Congress (for the most part) right now, nor the ones yakking on talk radio.
One of the days, the Repub tent might get as big as the Dem tent used to be. Not yet. :-)
But I'd still drink a beer with ya! Make mine Dixie. Stupid Cajun joint I frequent here just quit carrying it for some reason.
What I was saying, ER, was that you and I are not as far apart as some would have us believe.( That includes the Talk Radio people.)
Now, Toad and I? Well, that's a different story.
Oh, and by the way, Toad, I already complained about the wasteful, pork-barrel spending in the Energy bill.
Until the President has Line-Item Veto power,(A power that almost every Governor in America enjoys,) Then Pork and Corporate subsidies are hardly the President's fault.
Toad Suck Ferry.
(Snicker)
That's a place in Arkansas:
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?searchtype=address&country=US&addtohistory=&searchtab=home&address=&city=Toad+Suck+Ferry&state=AR&zipcode=
(Snicker. I AM in touch with my inner fifth-grader.)
ER, believe it or not, I have actually been to Toad Suck Ferry, Arkansas.
I delivered a load of roofing shingles there in 2002. (back in my "Over The Road" days...)
Small world indeed!
And by the way, the fifth grade was the best 3 years of my life!!
My favorite name for a place that I have ever been is "Big Bone Lick" in Kentucky. (Snicker!) ;)
ER
I am not anti-business. I am anti free handouts to businesses who don't need this money. I am also for responsible businesses who spend their own money for their R&D and clean up their own messes and pay their fair share in taxes and don't avoid them by incorporating in Bermuda.
What's wrong with that?
Tug:
If you are up for a challenge let me know, I guarantee you will be a lot easier than I am.
We'll meet in Gnaw Bone, Indiana.
Then there is Sweet Gum Head, Fla., just below the 'Bama line in the Panhandle. Drove through there once!
Possum Kingdom lake, in Texas.
Dead Indian lake, in western Oklahoma. ...
Toad, I will not fight a battle of wits with an un-armed opponent.
Post a Comment