god, why don't they spend less time playing attention whore and a bit more time actually working together

really, what was it pelosi said the other day. "I'm saving the planet". sure you are nancy, sure you are. now go back into session and get something done besides apologizing to peoples ancestors and non-binding resolutions. k?

I meant everyone

but I like the fact tha Haggis uses a report from the head of a far left organization to "dispel myths about drilling".

the futures market would immediately drop, which would affect the price short term. long term would take the oil getting here.

but regardless,apparently what you missed in my post is that we're talking about two different things. I was merely pointing out what is going on in DC while you are making it a partisan issue. fair enough.

The big question is whether it's a natural occurrence or a man-made phenomenon. There are convincing arguments both ways, but I say that it doesn't matter.

I do believe that all the Co2 we're spewing into the atmosphere can't be a good thing.

Nowhere in your article did it state that the off shore drilling woud have any effect on oil speculation. In fact, from a link contained within the article, it states:

"Opening these areas to drilling would cause oil prices to fall immediately, proponents say, as oil traders would fret less about future production. They also say it would lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

Critics -- along with the government's Energy Information Administration -- say any price drop would take years to materialize and be minimal at best -- maybe 2 or 3 cents off a gallon of gas.
Moreover, they say focusing on more oil drilling misses the point: The country should be figuring out a way to use less oil, not drill more, and that it's counterproductive when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions."



One political party performing a grand media stunt over an issue that has no substance isn't a partisan issue?

I'm just saying the issue of offshore driling to solve your current or future problems is redundant. Even the government body within the Department of Energy whose purpose it is "to provide policy-independent data, forecasts, and analyses to promote sound policy making, efficient markets, and public understanding regarding energy and its interaction with the economy and the environment." says that it's a useless idea.

I don't really care which side is doing this, if the Democrats did this I'd say they were being wankers as well. It's strawman stuff, as I said before.

Again,

FACTS OR GTFO

Of course it matters.

The large majority of Co2 in the atmosphere is naturally occurring. It is not an inherently destructive substance, and it's warming effect on the atmosphere is a good thing that makes life on this planet possible.

I don't personally think all the Co2 going into the air as a result of our industrialized society is a good thing, but I can't with any seriousness call it a bad thing. We don't know what it is. Making blanket statements like this is

And once again I am reminded of McCain's support of nuclear power...which I wholeheartedly support. Too bad he's for the war.

I wouldn't think so. If global warming is a man-made phenomenon then it's a symptom, not the cause.

I said all the Co2 we're spewing is a bad thing. By which I meant the excess of that naturally occurring substance we produce and "adding" to the atmosphere.

but i just dont see how you can ignore the fact that more oil on the market would reduce the price. and for everyone who says "well it'll be x years before we can get it and make a difference"
how high will oil be by then if we dont? what if we had started back in the 90's? wouldnt oil be cheaper now.

also what about the idea of getting our own oil so we dont depend on other countries. like this.

And if it's a natural occurrence it's not a symptom of anything. That's why it matters that we be able to distinguish what's going on.

The "excess" of what we're spewing compared to what nature produces is similar to the "excess" of liquid you encounter when you pee in the pool. That alone might be enough to disrupt the natural order of the Earth's CO2 cycle, but we don't know that for sure, so we don't know if it's a bad thing or not.

If the US truly wants the cost of oil to go down, they need to develop ways to reduce their energy usage. We all do. There is no other feasible way.

I'm saying that if we do our part to clean up the planet, and global warming is still occurring, then no harm no foul. At least we cleaned up our planet.

The "strawman" was your idea that because what Haggis noted came from a "left-leaning" source it was somehow invalid or untrue.

Yes, both sides are acting like children, but a promise to do something should not be a promise to do anything at all, even something that won't really work all that well.

um, I thought that since he brought up the "strawman" it was that its not really an issue they can deal with. him using a left leaning source is just as normal as RDD using fox news. I just like the way the source points out that newts site is far right but fails to mention its own leanings. all of that is irrelevant.
what I'm saying is, and what your saying is, they're all being stupid instead of doing anything or looking for the right answers.

this is where we tie in the current conversation on nuclear power. which I now know at least Hobbes and AZ I agree with.

Nuclear is a good short term solution, however the long term problem is the same as it's always been: disposal of the waste.

To be fair, it's more likely to make you sterile.


I can't really see the downside to that.

I've already passed my genetic material on to an offspring. I no longer need you

sorry, man I meant no offense to either of you. I know you catch a lot of flack for hard right leanings. so ergo you were the easiest example to be on the opposite of Haggis.
but yea, anything to get away from depending on other countries is good. thus I am for all alternatives and more drilling/refineries...whatever.
I doubt bush will call a session though.

Nuclear waste isn't the problem it's hyped to be. Nuclear Power Plants have a bum rap.

Which isn't to say that we shouldn't always be exploring new technologies and stuff, even if our power were already cheap and clean, we'd want to get it cheaper and cleaner.

Nuclear power isn't the end solution, but it's certainly the cleanest, cheapest, and longest term solution available to us currently.

Plus, post-apocalyptic LARPing is going to totally rock.

Am I the only one that is surprised they turn the lights off in the capitol building?

In an urgent memo sent to GOP Members and staff Saturday ("A Call to Action on American Energy"), Republican Leader John Boehner (R-) and Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) hailed Friday's action, and encouraged House Republicans to return to the Capitol beginning Monday morning to help keep the historic effort going," said a press release just released by Minority Leader Boehner's office.

"It's not a request we make lightly. But the American people are suffering," Boehner and Blunt said in the memo. "The consequences of continued congressional inaction on gas prices are unacceptable. We've called on the Speaker to call Congress back into an emergency session this month and schedule a vote on the American Energy Act. We must continue to make a stand until the Speaker complies."

Here comes the punchline:

Update - Neither Boehner nor Blunt are expected to be in attendance at Monday's talkfest, and its unclear if they will show up at any point during the week, according to GOP leadership aides.

Wow, Republicans pull a political stunt over a strawman issue for media attention. TEH SHOCK

The three big myths about off shore oil drilling

MYTH #1 -- 'DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS'

Newt Gingrich's 527 organization, American Solutions, is promoting a "Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less" campaign, collecting over one million signatures on its petition to Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices" by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves" off our coasts.

American Solutions is funded by right-wing Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who wants Americans to place another bad bet on oil drilling. As the Energy Information Administration (EIA) has explained, "access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."

But because United States demand for oil far outstrips production -- we consume 25 percent of the world's supply but have two percent of the proven reserves -- further exploitation of domestic resources will not have a long-term impact either. After 2030, the EIA found, "any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."

There are numerous ways to immediately affect prices, from use of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to improved oversight of the oil markets. Over the long term, we must fight global warming and break our addiction to oil through modern technology like plug-in hybrids and smart growth planning.

MYTH #2 -- CHINA ON OUR COASTS

Conservatives from Rudy Giuliani to Dick Cheney have repeatedly claimed that the United States needs to start drilling for off-shore oil because China is taking "American oil" off the coast of Cuba, just "60 miles off the coast of Florida."

Cheney exhorted, "Even the communists have figured out that a good answer to high prices is more supply." That same day, Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) wrote that Castro was allowing drilling "45 miles from the Florida keys."

Rep. George Radanovich (R-CA) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) have also raised the specter of Chinese drilling just off U.S. shores. However, this modern invocation of the Red Scare the claim is completely false.

As Cheney was forced to acknowledge, "no Chinese firm is drilling" off Cuba's coast. Talking Points Memo has recorded the large number of conservatives hyping the false story.The Washington Post's Ben Pershing said the China/Cuba oil drilling claim is the "myth that keeps on giving," calling it "just too juicy not to repeat."

MYTH #3 -- 'NOT A DROP WAS SPILLED'

Offshore drilling advocates know that the specter of oil-slicked beaches would doom their campaign, so they are desperate to wish its environmental impact away.

Yesterday, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) claimed "not a drop of oil was spilled during Katrina or Rita." This myth has been told again and again by the likes ofGov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA), Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, Mike Huckabee, George Will, and Bill O'Reilly.

There were, in fact, major onshore and offshore spills due to the hurricanes. According to the official Minerals Management Service report, the hurricanes caused 124 offshore spills for a total of 743,700 gallons, six spilling 42,000 gallons or more.

The largest of these spills dropped 152,250 gallons, well over the 100,000 gallon threshhold considered a "major spill." In addition, the hurricanes caused disastrous spills onshore throughout southeast Louisiana and the rest of the Gulf Coast as tanks, pipelines, refineries and other industrial facilities were destroyed, for a total of 595 different oil spills.

The nine million gallons reported spilled were comparable with the Exxon Valdez's 10.8 million gallons, but unlike the Exxon Valdez, they were distributed throughout Louisiana, Mississippi, and other Gulf Coast states, many in residential areas.

This made me laugh

Hey, I got an idea. Why doesn't Pelosi let congress fargING VOTE ON THIS DAMN BILL INSTEAD OF PULLING THIS STALLING TACTIC? Now they don't get the farging chance because they're on vacation or some shot. Congress has a 9% approval rating if I'm not mistaken. I wonder why?

WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans are poised to shut down the government if they are not allowed a vote on new oil drilling legislation.

This comes even as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi indicated she could budge on allowing a drilling vote, which so far she and her Senate counterpart have blocked from seeing daylight in Congress.

Current bans on the Outer Continental Shelf and oil shale drilling expire on the first day of the coming fiscal year: Oct. 1. Now, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., is leading a group of GOP senators celebrating the day, which they have dubbed "American Energy Freedom Day."

"The overwhelming majority of Republican Senators have pledged to protect October 1 as American Energy Freedom Day so we can reduce dependence on foreign oil and lower the cost of gas at the pump," DeMint said, according to a release from his office.

"Many people aren’t aware that the bans on drilling must be renewed every year, and all we have to do is allow these prohibitions to expire on October 1. In just 50 days, Americans will have the freedom to pursue their own energy resources here at home. Our letter is very straightforward: we will actively oppose any effort to extend the bans on offshore drilling and oil shale," DeMint said.

This is setting the stage for a showdown in September with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and most other Demorats who oppose this drilling.

In response to DeMint, Reid spokesman Jim Manley said: "Isn't this the same day that Republicans would be endangering the delivery of Social Security checks because of their misguided attempts to promote energy policies that will do nothing to deal with the short term problems facing the country?"

Reid and Pelosi have avoided holding votes on drilling because of growing support among their own ranks for such legislation amid rising energy prices. Democratic leadership maintains new drilling won't change prices in the near term.

Reid and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., even cancelled markups of spending bills that renewed the moratoria, a move that was a tacit admission that there were enough votes to override Democratic opposition to drilling.

Reid has said he intends to try to renew the bans when Congress returns in September through a continuing spending resolution -- a measure used to bypass the annual spending bills, and adopt the current spending levels until the new Congress takes its seat. But to pass his version, Reid will need a filibuster-breaking 60 votes, which could prove difficult.

In a letter from DeMint to Reid, DeMint indicates the GOP has the votes to sustain any veto of a continuing resolution that might get 60 votes.

But if Congress can't agree to a continuing resolution before Oct. 1, the government shuts down.

Pelosi, speaking Monday on CNN's "Larry King Live," said "We can do that. We can have a vote on (oil drilling)."

The Hill newspaper reported she indicated that a vote would be part of a larger package that included one of her pet projects, releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. She says she believes that would reduce gasoline prices immediately, whereas, she says, oil drilling might never reduce prices.

"But it has to be part of something that says we want to bring immediate relief to the public and is not just a hoax on them,” Pelosi said.

She even indicated that she might support a package that includes drilling, according to The Hill.

“It’s not excluded, let’s put it that way,” Pelosi said.

But Republicans who have been protesting Democrats' anti-drilling stance said they are not impressed with Pelosi's apparent change of heart. Lawmakers told reporters Tueday morning her comments don't go far enough, and they still want a vote.

Pelosi's apparent change in heart comes as Republicans on Capitol Hill have taken the diminished bully pulpit to decry Democrats' actions over energy prices. Although the House is officially out of session, House Republicans have stayed in Washington grab whoever they can, whether its reporters or tourists, to criticize Democrats, they say, for not holding a vote on drilling.

Republicans believe that lifting a ban on offshore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf not only would increase long-term domestic fuel capacity, but drop prices immediately by sending a signal to the oil markets.

Democrats instead have sought more market controls, the release from the petroleum reserve, and a requirement that federal lands already under lease be explored before more federal land, like the OCS, is doled out to oil companies.

Click here for the full report from The Hill.