 |
"In 1996 the Republican-majority House and Senate voted to allow drilling in ANWR, but this legislation was vetoed by President Clinton." Arctic Refuge drilling controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There has yet been no change in the leadership of the Party.
It just continues on today, with the master plan of the "do nothing, don't drill" democrats.
They have prevented us from obtaining and using our own oil for decades now, and it would appear, even at $4 a gallon gas and $5 a gallon diesel, they still don't want us to use our own oil.
Hello George:Quote:
Originally Posted by George_1950
Nuthin... What did the Republican dufus in chief do? Nuthin.
What's your point?
excon
Hey ex,
Have you forgotten that Bush proposed an energy plan, at the beginning of his presidency,
That included opening up Drilling for our own oil.
If the Democrats had not filibustered this plan, and the drilling had begun then, we would not be asking all these questions about the high price of our gas right now.
I know, that's an issue that get easily overlooked.
Hey Prog:
Yeah, I remember... I also remember him telling us to live our lives after he attacked Iraq... THAT would have been a prudent time to tell us to conserve.
This is a MUCH bigger issue than who the bad guy is. BOTH parties suck on this issue. The righty's think we can drill our way out, and the Dems think we can conserve our way out. BOTH, of course, are WRONG.
excon
PS> By the way, Obama didn't this nuclear power. He called for SAFE nuclear power. That's a BIG change for the Dems.
That is a post that I can stand by 100%!Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
While conservation needs to be at the top of the page, I still fail to see how starting now to obtain our own could be anything but a good idea.
"The George W. Bush administration pushed to perform exploratory drilling for crude oil and natural gas in and around the refuge. The House of Representatives voted in mid-2000 to allow drilling. In April 2002 the Senate rejected it.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
"Arctic Refuge drilling was again approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives as part of the Energy Bill on April 21, 2005,[25] but the Arctic Refuge provision was later removed by the House-Senate conference committee. The Republican-controlled Senate passed Arctic Refuge drilling on March 16, 2005 as part of the federal budget resolution for fiscal year 2006.[26] That Arctic Refuge provision was removed during the reconciliation process, due to Democrats in the House of Representatives who signed a letter stating they would oppose any version of the budget that had Arctic Refuge drilling in it.[27]
"On December 15, 2005 Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska, attached an Arctic Refuge drilling amendment to the annual defense appropriations bill. A group of Democratic Senators led a successful filibuster of the bill on December 21, and the language was subsequently removed.[28]" same article
It's time to hold the Dems accountable; all of them.
Hello again,
There is only so much oil. Does anybody think we're going to leave any of it in the ground??
Interestingly, the Republicans think oil is unlimited. And, the Dems think we're going to leave some in the ground..
WHAT??
Until those people get a grip, we're going to continue down this loooong and lonely downhill road.
Buy gold.
excon
I just don't understand the idea that we can't drill our way out of this, since it is used as an excuse not to increase drilling. How is it possible that more supply is bad?
Clinton did nothing to increase domestic energy, he did nothing of consequence when the twin towers were bombed the first time, he did nothing when he could have had Bin Laden.
Actually, when WAS the last Democrat president who did anything positive for this country?
EXACTLY!Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
What a sorry excuse, it will take too long!!
OK, start now, and we won't still be arguing about this in another 5 or 10 years.
As to your last question.
The silence is deafening.
They are thinking-up some new names to call you.Quote:
Originally Posted by progunr
Hello Gal:Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
I don't know if balancing the budget counts, but it was a Democrat who last did that. It matters to me, though. It SHOULD matter to you. Maybe if we didn't borrow a trillion or so $$'s for a misguided war, maybe our dollar would be twice as high as it is, because that where it was when Bush was elected. Maybe THEN the price of gas would be cheaper. As a matter of fact, it WOULD be. The price of crude is priced in dollars. A doubling of the price just makes the sellers even.
Don't get me wrong. Democrats suck too. But, contrary to popular opinion, it appears they are a better minder of yours and my money.
excon
Let's see, who was running that Congress? Mr. Gingrich in the House. Remember how he got blamed by your man for 'shutting down the government'? Don't you wish your crowd knew how to do that?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Ex, are you old enough to remember WW2? Wonder what you would say about the cost and casualties of that war? Germany didn't invade or attack us, but we proceeded to stomp them just because they were on the wrong side of the issues, and allied with Japan who DID attack us. This country could not win WW2 today. We have too many influential people who either actually hate their own country, or are ashamed of our success. ABC, NBC, CBS, et al, would be telling us daily how we were losing the war, and giving us a running body count. On some days, sadly, we lost thousands! You should thank God daily that the news media were not like they are today, or you would be speaking either German or Japanese and saying "Heil -------", and driving a Volkswagen bug.
The same thing the Republicans did (see G. Herbert Walker Bush) before the Democrats took office.Quote:
Originally Posted by George_1950
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:38 PM. |