published Sunday, March 16th, 2014

The Pipeline

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

244
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.

Ignorant.

March 16, 2014 at 12:03 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Tooney is a ninny.

March 16, 2014 at 12:04 a.m.
prairie_dog said...

This guy will find a way to twist Mothers Day into a Republican plot to ban abortions.

Can't wait to see what he does to Jesus for Easter.

March 16, 2014 at 12:23 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Why ignorant, zab?

There is no fossil fuel dirtier than tar sands oil and the pre-refined form in which it is shipped out of Alberta is extremely toxic. Toilet waste seems like an appropriate metaphor for the noxious product that Canada wants to pipe more of to the rest of the world.

The environmental damage done by Canada through exploitation of tar sands cannot be justified by anyone who believes humans have a responsibility as stewards for our planet.

The paradox is that the Keystone pipeline would actually raise the price that Americans pay for oil by reducing the backlog/excess of oil at the Cushing Oklahoma distribution point. The Keystone would allow tar sands oil to flow straight to the Gulf coast for export and thereby allow Canada to sell/export it's oil for a much higher price based on world Bent oil prices. The reduced oil backlog in the US would likely allow US oil prices to rise back to world prices, costing all Americans more at the pump.

Are you sure you favor the Keystone pipeline? Or do you own oil company stock?

March 16, 2014 at 12:41 a.m.

What if I did own oil company stock? What's wrong with that? Maybe I should purchase some "carbon credits" instead and make Al Gore wealthier? I guess the latter would be more ethical, huh?

Jobs, jobs, jobs.

"exploitation of tar sands" you make it sound like rape or child abuse.

We'll all be just fine. Until you libs have an alternative, a real alternative, not the fairy dust you try and hock, then let it flow! Jobs, jobs, jobs.

March 16, 2014 at 1:53 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

All of a sudden nancypants cares about low gas prices. Bullsh!t nancy. You libs hope for high gas prices all day long. Even Obama wants high gas prices. If the Keystone pipeline would cause prices to climb, you should be all in for it. You have other reasons for not wanting it. So stop with your bullsh!t and come clean.

you're full of dog squeeze and you damn well know it.

March 16, 2014 at 2:32 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Now that you mention it, the environmental damage caused by tar sands extraction could well be considered like the rape of mother earth.

And oil is a finite resource for which there is no equivalent alternative. Humans can either cut back voluntarily or deal with scarcity on the down side of the bell curve. Our choice.

I take it you are OK with paying more for your gas in order to help Canadians market their tar sands oil overseas?

As for jobs (and population), they will fall as scarcer oil becomes less and less affordable, just as they rose as energy use increased over the last 150 years or so. Take a look at long-term charts for world energy and population growth side by side, pretty amazing corollary.

Since I want to conserve resources for future generations, doesn't that make me a conservative?

March 16, 2014 at 2:36 a.m.
nucanuck said...

You're right, toejam, I don't care at all about gas prices. I only drive my Smart car rarely and gas is not a factor in my budget.

I oppose the Keystone pipeline because it brings shame to the Canadian efforts toward a cleaner environment.

Assuming you favor the pipeline, please tell us the benefits you see.

March 16, 2014 at 2:46 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Gas Price Hypocrisy

March 16, 2014 at 2:58 a.m.
alprova said...

Some of you Republican cheerleaders need to wake up to a simple and undeniable fact or two;

1.) As long as there is a Democrat in the White House, tar sand pipelines, which do nothing for the price of a gallon of gas at the pump in this area of the world, are not going to be prioritized on a to-do list, and;

2.) Those pipelines are not going to provide more than a handful of permanent jobs after they are built, and;

3.) What possible benefit would the United States receive from toxic oil that is pumped through our lands that cannot ever be refined to be allowed to burn in so much as one American vehicle?

March 16, 2014 at 3:43 a.m.
fairmon said...

nucanuck ask.....

Are you sure you favor the Keystone pipeline? Or do you own oil company stock?

Yes and yes.

Anyway, what is wrong with helping our friendly Neighbors? Someone that doesn't like us will sell less oil on the world market and the oil wealth transfer will go to a country that is a friend of America.

World peace? A booming North American and European economy? I would like to see an initiative that made North America (Canada, U.S., Mexico) the low cost preferred source for all oil and energy. Consider the impact on the OPEC countries who could not arm themselves or afford to buy weapons and ammunition while Russia and others could not afford to provide them the necessary funding or military equipment. There would be no reason for our presence in any of those radical and irrational countries nor would there be a need for foreign aid.

Accelerate the development of alternatives and be the preferred and possibly the only source. Oil and energy are the weapons of choice to assure world peace and a healthy economy.

March 16, 2014 at 5:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

Is it safer and better to transport the Canadian oil by rail and tanker truck? Would it be better to have the related jobs even if smaller than publicized than to have the pipeline go to the east coast of Canada and the oil to China?

March 16, 2014 at 5:18 a.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said...

1.) As long as there is a Democrat in the White House, tar sand pipelines, which do nothing for the price of a gallon of gas at the pump in this area of the world, are not going to be prioritized on a to-do list.

Are you sure that is Hilary's position? A hand full of jobs is better than zero. The taxable transporting revenue is better than zero. An MPL is required by law to pay 90% of profits in dividends. The risk is much less than the chicken little the shy is falling clamor some exude. I am wondering if congress and administration prefers high unemployment as a means of controlling inflation?

March 16, 2014 at 5:28 a.m.
cactus said...

Obama's buddy, Warren Buffett, owns the railroad that currently transports the Canadian oil through the United States from Canada. When the pipeline is built, Buffett's railroad will lose that business. By the way, pipelines are much safer than trains.

March 16, 2014 at 6:20 a.m.
degage said...

Al, you are still wrong about the unemployment for Jan 2009. According to bls.gov on Feb 6 2009 the total unemployment for January was 7.6. The figures come out every month on the first Friday for the month before by the BLS.

My reason for continuing this is how you are always wanting facts and that is the fact. Of course you may be considering the amount of people that quit looking for jobs. If you figure that into todays figures the rate would be much higher, something like 12% or more.

March 16, 2014 at 6:48 a.m.
degage said...

Cactus, our democrat friends don't want to here anything about the oil being transported by Warren Buffets trains and how dangerous it is. Buffet backed this administration so he needs to get his paybacks. Just like Soros and the Brazil deal.

March 16, 2014 at 7:01 a.m.
wallyworld said...

Another shining example of our uneducated citizens. This country is doomed unless we up our quality of education and information. We should move toward more science and learning the English language instead of teaching science fiction and voodoo mythology. our democrat(sic) friends don't want to here(sic) anything** -- is that supposed to be English?

March 16, 2014 at 8:02 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Al, you are still wrong about the unemployment for Jan 2009. According to bls.gov on Feb 6 2009 the total unemployment for January was 7.6. The figures come out every month on the first Friday for the month before by the BLS.

My reason for continuing this is how you are always wanting facts and that is the fact."

Degage, why are you harping on Al over a couple of tenths of a percentage point and yet, not even one time, did you say anything to Toes, who posted this jewel:

"Yeah alpo. Too bad for you that gas was $1.80 a gallon at the end of the Bush years. With unemployment around 4 to 5%."

And I guess with your rationale, there were no people that had given up looking for work during the administrations prior to 2009.

March 16, 2014 at 8:05 a.m.
limric said...

Good points Nucanuck.

There is another equally important pipeline. The Enbridge Line9 from Montreal to Portland Maine is due to be reversed to carry tar sands crude to S. Portland for tanker export.

Like them or not I said these sewer lines were a done deal long ago. Just follow the money. The current administration, regardless of its posturing has green lighted them. Bet on it.

Tar sands crude will have no effect on the price of heating oil, jetA, gasoline etc. and very little economic (ie.jobs) impact. The environment impact however could be hideous. Check out Arkansas or what's happening in N. Dakota. Not unlike Jeb Clampett, oil's bubbling up in farmers fields. Not to mention the devastation unfolding in Canada's wilderness and public lands.

The drill here-drill now crowd might also want to look into how much energy is used to even refine this stuff as bunker fuel.

They're coming, you might as well curse the clouds for all the good it'd do.

March 16, 2014 at 8:08 a.m.
joepulitzer said...

al, al, hey al! Where'd he go? Probably trying to find an expensive gas station.

March 16, 2014 at 8:15 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

I don't know why most people believe that gas prices aren't tied to inflation. We pay more for just about everything. Why would gas be any different? A pipeline is not going to change what we pay at the pump other than maybe a few cents, particularly when the intent of this pipeline is to deliver tar sands to TX, where the oil can be refined and exported to other countries.

March 16, 2014 at 8:17 a.m.
conservative said...

I am in the mood for some fun at the expense of Liberals with this one.

Earth to Liberals, the oil is contained in a pipeline. You people call ALL oil dirty, whether it is transported by pipeline, truck or ship.

Think.

Then you use the oil just like everyone else.

Think.

Before the day is over, I will probably have to explain to Liberals how they use oil.

Probably touch on another topic as well.

March 16, 2014 at 8:19 a.m.
degage said...

Yup, wally, Hear ,Hear , Hear. Do you want me to spell it 100 times? Senior moment, you do realize when you become a senior citizens you get more perks like a senior moment. Are you going to police everyone's English or just mine. Sorry I upset you so much when I make a mistake.

March 16, 2014 at 8:42 a.m.
degage said...

Gaus, the reason is , he is adamant about facts, 2 tenths ,5 tenths whatever! It's not about the amount it is about FACTS! Toes was wrong but Al's facts were wrong too. You see he was using fact check instead of the BLS.

March 16, 2014 at 8:49 a.m.
alprova said...

degage wrote: "Al, you are still wrong about the unemployment for Jan 2009. According to bls.gov on Feb 6 2009 the total unemployment for January was 7.6. The figures come out every month on the first Friday for the month before by the BLS."

I supplied the link directly to the February BLS FINAL report. It was 8.1 percent.

Your proof is where?

"My reason for continuing this is how you are always wanting facts and that is the fact."

Look again.

"Of course you may be considering the amount of people that quit looking for jobs."

I consider that to be totally nonsense. People in need of a job do not quit looking for one.

"If you figure that into todays figures the rate would be much higher, something like 12% or more."

But of course. I hop over bodies in the street who have starved to death because they cannot find work and therefore eat.

March 16, 2014 at 8:58 a.m.
wallyworld said...

Your grammar is the least of your problems. I know all the people you listen to daily think it is 'cute' to use the noun (democrat) when the adjective is required before party, i.e. democratic party is made up of democrats. I just love it when YOU go after someone for using 'a' instead of 'an'. You republicans are so sophomoric. I'm just pointing out the average citizen these days is a non-intellect and proud of it.

March 16, 2014 at 9:08 a.m.
joepulitzer said...

al, go sell another sucker a used car.

March 16, 2014 at 9:08 a.m.
inquiringmind said...

Gas, you need to go get some education. Were you sleeping at the wheel when the banks crashed under George the Younger, and have you never heard that oil is a commodity bought and sold on the open market for what folks speculate they can price it?

al, the unemployment rate is a calculated average number useful to gage the changes in the overall state of employment for those seeking jobs. The unemployment rate in urban chattanooga and out in meth counties is probably closer to 25%. But maybe the meth cookers ought to be considered "employed?". From the march report: "Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 175,000 in February, and the unemployment rate was little changed at 6.7 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in professional and business services and in wholesale trade but declined in information. Reference: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

March 16, 2014 at 9:16 a.m.
inquiringmind said...

That is the BLS March report.

March 16, 2014 at 9:17 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Inquiringmind, with all due respect, I am probably one of the most educated posters on this board. I understand that oil is a commodity and certain circumstances (ie, the financial meltdown of 2008) do affect the price of gas. However, crude oil is not exempt from inflation. To argue otherwise, is extremely misguided.

March 16, 2014 at 9:29 a.m.

"rape of mother earth" Yeah, that's what it is. Gee, I've never heard that before.

I don't see y'all calling mother earth a bitch when there're earthquakes, tsunamis, winter storms, hurricanes or tornadoes, and when you're freezing your nuts off in a really cold winter. Oh, yeah, that's right, sweaty Al say's that's our fault too.

What else is it for? It's a gift to us, and there's nothing wrong with using it to its fullest.

"accelerate the development of alternatives" There're no alternatives that can replace oil and all the amazing things that are possible because of it.

We'd be nothing without oil. Unless you have an alternative that can replace it then you should stop criticizing it. Typical liberal approach of making us feel guilty for our good fortune.

"cut back" Cut back on what, accomplishing things, wanting to experience things, being productive, heating our homes in a cold winter, making our lives easier?

The world is nothing without oil.

March 16, 2014 at 9:43 a.m.
dude_abides said...

zableedofisterix said... "I don't see y'all calling mother earth a bitch..."

"We'd be nothing without oil. Unless you have an alternative that can replace it then you should stop criticizing it."

feeblefister... if you had a mind, you'd be out of it.

March 16, 2014 at 10:09 a.m.
dude_abides said...

When the last barrel of oil is being pumped out of fister's "bitch," we'll discover that it's the cure for cancer.

(for people like degage: that was a joke, having to do with the exhausting of resources)

March 16, 2014 at 10:12 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Fister, the world will eventually "run out" of oil. Will the Earth no longer exist? There was a world before oil, there will be a world after it. You sound a lot like the people that remarked, "the car will never replace the horse and buggy". "The world is nothing without oil"? You sound like an ExxonMobil ad.

March 16, 2014 at 10:13 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

The citizens of Rossville are safe from Alpo on Sundays. We are not.

March 16, 2014 at 10:18 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Oh, heck, PlainTruth's up! All the Waffle Houses are on Red Alert! I understand they shift staff depending on which way he turns coming out of his driveway.

March 16, 2014 at 10:32 a.m.
rick1 said...

More hypocrisy from environmentalists. This lady is living off the grid just like the way environmentalists expect all of us to live. Yet when she is charged and found guilty of living differently then her neighbors we hear nothing from Green Peace, The Sierra Club or other environmental groups.

That aside, what should be more concerning for all of us is the over reaching abuse of law enforcement and the courts.

Wake up people, we are losing are liberties more and more every day.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/legal-courts/2014/03/14/off-the-grid-florida-widow-guilty-of-sustainable-living#.UyW0GLROXIV

March 16, 2014 at 10:34 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

dude_: Nah, I'm more of an IHOP guy. You're the Starbucks kind0guy, I'm sure. Enjoying your Cinnamon Dolce Latte (w/soy) and perhaps a Cranberry Orange Scone (organic). And lovingly eyeing that unisex bathroom.

March 16, 2014 at 10:49 a.m.
nucanuck said...

There are two different perspectives on future oil (and energy) use: the cornucopian and the peak oilers.

The cornucopians assume that one way or another, technology will find a way to keep an ever increasing supply of energy flowing. The peak oilers believe that, for a variety of reasons, much of the remaining fossil fuel resources will never be extracted.

The graphs showing the soaring amounts of investment to extract a falling amount of energy are like a cold shower to those who examine the charts. There is a reason that major oil companies are cutting back on capital investment dollars. They see what most don't yet see or believe…that fossil fuel extraction is becoming uneconomic as only the hardest to access resources remain; that the higher product prices can not be absorbed by the economic realities; that there is a point at which prices choke down the economy.

Almost no major oil companies buy into fracking as a solution. Why? The numbers are horrible and somebody is going to be left holding the bag on those investments as the wells-drilled numbers can't keep up with the soaring depletion numbers.

Peak conventional oil produced topped in 2005. Since then the increases have come from alternatives, each of which has serious drawbacks and limitations. Tight (fracked) oil will peak in the US before the end of this decade and the short lived US oil independence dream will be shattered. The US will have to continue to reduce demand or increase imports in a world where exports will be less and less available because of internal exporter demand and declining production. Depletion in old wells only accelerates.

In spite of the accumulating evidence, cornucopians believe that there will always be enough or there will be substitutes. We will find out soon enough who is wrong.

March 16, 2014 at 10:59 a.m.
degage said...

Al, you are right , what came out the first week of march for Feb total report was 8.3. Goggle (unemployment for 2009) and you will see the stats for the whole year under the bls.gov link. enough for this argument, the stats prove me right so you just go on believing you whatever you want.

Inq, are you talking about 2014? March report from BLS for Feb 2014 was exactly that. seems you get it.

March 16, 2014 at 11:02 a.m.
fairmon said...

The law of supply and demand works when left alone by government. An increased supply of oil to an excess would drive the price of oil down thus the price of a gallon of gas. Would gas at one half today's price be the greatest economic boost we could hope for? Gas prices are a tax on those who can least afford it.

March 16, 2014 at 11:05 a.m.
Maximus said...

Funny how most of the useful idiots of the left like Bennett, Alpeg, and elderly Gaushog are for the legalization of the gateway to loserville drug marijuana but are screaming like little girls against a pipeline that in the words of Barry The Welfare Pimp will provide "shovel ready" jobs for hundreds. Of course this time it is not a lie.

March 16, 2014 at 11:24 a.m.
Maximus said...

Rein in the EPA, pass tort reform and disband all needless labor unions and we will start manufacturing things in America again. Right now you have to go to an antique store to buy something American made unless of course it happens to be a peace maker......(firearm better known as a gun for you useful idiots of the left).

The pipeline should be built and it should be built now! Call Corker.......he will get it done! Look what he did to the UAW! Lol! :)

March 16, 2014 at 11:36 a.m.
Maximus said...

Fairmon....good points! Other taxes on those that can't afford it.....cigarettes (of course these folks mostly poor become a healthcare burden on the tax payers also) and the TN Loser Lottery........I always see a LOT of the useful Obama voting idiots buying their lotto tickets when they don't seem to have enough money for a $2 steak.

A billboard I saw recently while making money in Cookeville, TN....5 Years Of Smoking A Pack A Day = $9,900.

I know what some of you are thinking. I only smoke about one fine Cuban cigar a month. If you are addicted to those cigs or dip you need to quit now or go broke while increasing your chances of a sometimes horrific death.

March 16, 2014 at 11:48 a.m.

dude, a-hole, what's the alternative, genius? You bitching libs are never happy, ever. Are you using a computer of some kind to be able to view this site , and post on here? Of course you are you lib putz. If not for oil you wouldn't be able to.

Instead of bitching about oil, enlighten me how it's going to be replaced in the near future?

Guass, oil is that important to the world we live in. It's what makes thing go, period. Who said there'll never be a replacement for it? That's what we have no and for long, long time. So, to bitch about the good fortune we have it just be there for us to use is idiocy. Scolding people for wanting to drive cars, needing to drive cars, wanting to accomplish things, use appliances, and have sterile and safe hospitals is really productive.

March 16, 2014 at 11:54 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

My faith is with Gassy. He's far more educated than the hoi-polloi on this forum.

March 16, 2014 at 12:01 p.m.
Maximus said...

Zable...excellent points but you have to understand that the useful idiots of the left particularly the extreme left Obamer supporters want to "downsize" our economy for a so called "more sustainable future" run of course by a huge elitist ruling class. Much of the unemployment and economic woes we are suffering through right now are part of this grand scheme to trash the economy while increasing the role of guvment in all of our lives. Obama's "time and a half for white collar workers" edict of last week violating the constitution and by passing Congress is just another old Marxist tactic that we will see as Obama's reign of mediocrity comes crashing down. In Obama's eyes and the eye's of his big Hollywood donors The Pipeline represents all the evils of freedom and corporate greed just ask Matt Damon. To a hard working, responsible, patriotic, American the pipeline represents economic progress, jobs, and $1.00 a gallon. For muscle car owners like myself bring on the pipeline so we can tell the Saudi's to go furck themselves!

March 16, 2014 at 12:10 p.m.
Maximus said...

PlainTruth....go ahead stake your claim with Gassy a 70 year old on guvment relief. Nice!

There is nothing so common as an educated derelict. A very wise man once said.

March 16, 2014 at 12:13 p.m.
dude_abides said...

zableedofisterix said... "Instead of bitching about oil, enlighten me how it's going to be replaced in the near future?"

See how you lost yourself in that sentence? It started out being a demand and then suddenly became a question, right at the end! How does that happen? It might be part of the reason you don't understand what words like conservative mean.

maximus! the Bard of Vanderbilt.

March 16, 2014 at 12:24 p.m.

Max, you're correct. Oil companies profiting from extracting oil and refining it is evil, and providing a service, is evil, yet that sweaty fat ass Gore has gotten "filthy rich" from "carbon credits" and black mailing politicians.

Guass, there was world before oil, and there will be a world after it, but so what? There was a world before cars, computers, modern hospitals, medicine, etc, etc., etc...."mother nature" has given us oil to use, what else is it for?

If you were around back in the horse and buggy days you would be bitching about horses and buggies and calling for everyone to not use them because horses $hit. That worked at the time, and it was eventually replaced. You'd lay a guilt trip on those who used horses. Find a replacement that works just as well, and you'll be rich.

March 16, 2014 at 12:25 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Plain-Truth hyphenates hoi polloi. He can be so ab-struse.

March 16, 2014 at 12:32 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"The law of supply and demand works when left alone by government. An increased supply of oil to an excess would drive the price of oil down thus the price of a gallon of gas. Would gas at one half today's price be the greatest economic boost we could hope for? Gas prices are a tax on those who can least afford it."

That is crap Fairmon. Oil is sold on a global market. The US exported more oil the last couple of years than it imported. The only chance for oil to be around "1.50" would be a US economic downturn akin to 2008. In fact, the only way your scenario is remotely feasible would be for the Govt to venture into the oil business a la Venezuela.

March 16, 2014 at 12:33 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Guass, there was world before oil, and there will be a world after it, but so what?"

Fister, you said it, not me. Let me refresh your memory:

"The world is nothing without oil."

March 16, 2014 at 12:36 p.m.

Dude, you're analysis of my post is worth dog doodoo. Answer the question. What will replace oil?

Cut back to what end? Why should we suffer when we don't have to?

If you're going to to condemn oil, and those that use it for their needs, then what't the alternative?

March 16, 2014 at 12:36 p.m.
dude_abides said...

bloodfist... We probably should let you continue to sodomize mother nature, since we took your slaves away. That resource worked at one time, too, didn't it?

March 16, 2014 at 12:37 p.m.
dude_abides said...

zableedofisterix said... "Answer the question. What will replace oil?"

LMAO

March 16, 2014 at 12:41 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"PlainTruth....go ahead stake your claim with Gassy a 70 year old on guvment relief. Nice!"

Maxipad, I'm 36 years old. I guarantee I am younger than you. Never took a dime from the government I didn't earn (my pay while I was in the military and the GI Bill). And even if I was "a 70 year old on guvment relief" at least I am not a delusional liar such as yourself. Life must be exhausting for you being envious of the wealthy all of the time. Keep working that 10.00 an hour job, bro. Eventually, you'll be one of those millionaires you claim to currently be (insert sarcasm now).

And you probably need to get back to work now. I'm sure the manager at the Kangaroo station where you work wouldn't be happy with you surfing the web when you should be ringing up customers items and turning on the gas pumps.

March 16, 2014 at 12:44 p.m.

Answer it , Dude. You have no answer. So, be glad you have oil, be very glad.

March 16, 2014 at 12:46 p.m.

Dude, you libs love sodomy, so that shouldn't bother you.

March 16, 2014 at 12:47 p.m.
dude_abides said...

dude_abides said... zableedofisterix said... "Answer the question. What will replace oil?"

LMAO

March 16, 2014 at 12:48 p.m.

"sodomize mother nature" "rape mother nature"

listen to the language these lefties use.

You have no answer, and you have no either as to how much oil there is either. It's all about control with you libs, and scare tactics. Libs bitch about oil even though it's keeping them from freezing their asses off. Astounding.

March 16, 2014 at 12:51 p.m.
dude_abides said...

zableedofisterix said... "You have no answer, and you have no either as to how much oil there is either."

Either answer your no either question or either however much oil the answer either is, you SOB! lmao

March 16, 2014 at 12:56 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

dude_ takes hollow shots at everyone…hyphens, dude? My gawd man. do you ever post an opinion? do you have the same attitude at your gubmint job?

March 16, 2014 at 12:57 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

dude_ seemingly wants to overtake his bff Easy as the nastiest a-hole on here.

March 16, 2014 at 1:02 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^^ and you tax dollars support the mofo.

March 16, 2014 at 1:03 p.m.

You have no answer, dude. zero. Just like all libs. You complain and lay guilt trips on everyone, but you have no alternatives that really work. Hypocrites. You like technology, but you don't like one of the key things that makes it possible.

March 16, 2014 at 1:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Ouch, PT... You, on the other hand...

March 16, 2014 at 1:12 p.m.
jesse said...

Looks like Bleeder beez scoring some points on here today!!

March 16, 2014 at 1:21 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"You have no answer, dude. zero. Just like all libs. You complain and lay guilt trips on everyone, but you have no alternatives that really work. Hypocrites. You like technology, but you don't like one of the key things that makes it possible."

Fister, it's real simple. Start an initiative similar to the US-Soviet space race in the 50's and 60's or the race to get the A-bomb. There are cars that run without petroleum, but as of now, it's just a niche market. Every American (that is not vested in petroleum) should be supporting this. Until then we are slaves to the oil companies and their lobbyists.

March 16, 2014 at 1:21 p.m.

It's not just cars, Gauss, oil is part of nearly everything that matters. The replacement would have to to be that versatile.

March 16, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.
Maximus said...

Gauss with losers like you in the military no wonder Obama is retreating. You are right about one thing, the company I own does do a LOT of business with Pilot and the Haslam boys. Good people.

You idiots of the left would have been against the building of the transatlantic railroad because we had to cut too many trees down and used too much evil coal to fuel the locomotive of progress. Again, as no one on this forum has denied, those against the building of the Keystone Pipeline are part of a plan to weaken the U.S.economy in the name of "sustainability" giving more power to leftist rule and less freedom and financial stability for the working man. Clay Bennett and others are juvenile thinking useful tools of the weak kneed left. More mice than men.

March 16, 2014 at 1:38 p.m.
jesse said...

Gassious, If every non commercial vehicle in the U S A was electric how much fossil fuel would it take to keepum running?

Ya STILL have to generate the electricity to power them with something! geo thermal is the answer IF we can just figure out how to drill a hole 500 miles deep!Solar and wind ain't NEVER gonna giter done!!

March 16, 2014 at 1:38 p.m.
nucanuck said...

It is not about being for or against oil. Humans are going to use energy as long as it remains obtainable. The issue is about being smart about a finite resource, the easy half of which we have already consumed. On our present path we will have stress on supply within a few years no matter what we do. There is an oil price point above which economic activity is curtailed and the economy contracts. Then the oil price falls, often below the cost of production, and suppliers pull back on production. That is exactly what has happened with nat gas over the last few years. Suppliers have stopped drilling because they were losing money at the prevailing prices. That cycle is reaching a tipping point because energy prices are rising faster than our collective ability to pay, stressing the economy.

We are all energy culture crack addicts and that won't change until and unless we are forced to do without. Governments won't force a reduction in energy...finite accessible affordable supply will. I contend that we are quickly approaching the time when availability will become an issue and that now is the time we should be making changes to smooth out the transition into an unavoidable lower energy future.

Why am I pushing the conservative/conservation cause, that is supposed to come from you rightees?

March 16, 2014 at 1:46 p.m.
conservative said...

Hey nucanuck, are you still consuming 2.3 earths?

You have yet to tell me how you are doing that or what you are doing to cause global warming.

March 16, 2014 at 1:56 p.m.

Nucanuck, as long long as libs like you use terms like "rape mother nature" "sodomize mother nature" and "energy culture crack addicts" then you're not be taken seriously. Just like "climate change skeptics" are being compared to holocaust deniers. Ridiculous.

We use what we need for the most part. What is wasting it. Al Gore using tons of fuel flying around the country to trying to sell us on "carbon credits" is a waste. BO and MO flying on separate planes to a vacation spot because they had a spat or something is a waste. But, someone driving to work, heating their home to a temperature that's comfortable for them, or driving to see family, is not a waste, and they shouldn't be made to feel guilty for doing it.

Oil isn't just about cars, it's touches every aspect of our lives. The medical field/hospitals could not survive without oil and all the products and devices necessary to make it work. You libs keeping bringing up transportation, but that's just one aspect of it.

With you libs conservation is about control, just like "climate change" is.

March 16, 2014 at 1:58 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"It's not just cars, Gauss, oil is part of nearly everything that matters. The replacement would have to to be that versatile."

And why couldn't it be?

"The medical field/hospitals could not survive without oil and all the products and devices necessary to make it work."

Yes they could. Quit believing the propaganda that is funded by oil companies and their stock holders.

"Gassious, If every non commercial vehicle in the U S A was electric how much fossil fuel would it take to keepum running?

Ya STILL have to generate the electricity to power them with something! geo thermal is the answer IF we can just figure out how to drill a hole 500 miles deep!Solar and wind ain't NEVER gonna giter done!!"

I never said electric was solely the answer. And I'm not talking about wind or solar either. I am talking of developing something that has never been used before. We can send a space shuttle into to space without a drop of petroleum, it's asinine to think Americans don't have the ingenuity to do the same with cars, 18 wheelers, etc.

March 16, 2014 at 2:11 p.m.

It's the profit that bothers you libs. You don't like that a corporation is profiting from oil. When the government makes money, that's fine though. When Al Gore becomes wealthy from his scam that's ok. What service does that cooky fat ass provide? You don't mind actors, movie producers/studios, singers, athletes, pot sellers and abortion providers making a profit, but you do mind certain kinds of corporations, businesses and certain ceos making money. You constantly blast the Koch brothers for spending their money they want, but you have no problem with Soros. You're hypocrites.

March 16, 2014 at 2:14 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"But, someone driving to work, heating their home to a temperature that's comfortable for them, or driving to see family, is not a waste, and they shouldn't be made to feel guilty for doing it."

No one is advocating feeling "guilty" about using fossil fuels. They are a necessary evil of American society. But to act as though there is a never-ending supply is a very selfish stance, particularly for the future generations. We both will probably die before the supply becomes dangerously low. IMO, there will be wars waged and millions will die because of future availability of oil unless the course is altered.

March 16, 2014 at 2:15 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

The world demand for oil could be satisfied with much lower production, and could be replaced with other fuels, if there were not so many people around.

Overpopulation is a byproduct of affluence.

Instead of producing more oil, why not starve a couple of billion people to death instead?

March 16, 2014 at 2:22 p.m.
wallyworld said...

prairie_dog, the starvation technique is already in use in a vast part of the world. The over-eating, under-achieving Amuricuns just haven't had to deal with it, YET!

March 16, 2014 at 2:42 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

^^ yeah, those basterd amurcans. skaroo them, eh wally?

March 16, 2014 at 3:06 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Toonboy recycles and so do I

The pipeline debate is nothing but raw politics, especially for the Fleabaggers, and it has little if anything to do with economics or the environment. It’s one side trying to gain political advantage over the other. The left wants a Corporatist state where assets are privately owned but in the solid control of the state. The right wants a Free-market state where there is minimal if any government interference. This is just the latest in this long struggle and the winners will only improve their political advantage and have marginal effect on our’s or the world’s economy or environment in the short term.

The Canadian tar sands oil is and will be extracted and taken to market and there is no doubt about that. The use of fossil fuels will be absolutely necessary to maintain the advanced economies of the world until other sources of energy can be developed. I think any reasonable person would say that what is on deck at present is not going to get it done. People that are really concerned about the survival of the poorer populations of the world and the environment will recognize that and try to make the best of what we have available to us.

Rail transport of this oil has grown from near zero at the beginning of 2011 to about 200,000 barrels a day now. If the pipeline is not built this will grow to between 800,000 and 1,000,000 barrels a day. Even if the oil was prohibited from coming into this country it will still be exported from the Canadian West coast and used anyway. Better it be transported and utilized under U.S. regulations than those of less concerned countries.

This pipeline has been studied almost to no end and appears that it will continue for some time yet. Every study has indicated that the pipeline is preferable to all others in safety, economic costs, and environmental harm. Those trying to delay or cancel the pipeline are only causing more harm than good to the economy and the environment.

The bottom line is this ... What means of transport, to market, is going to be the least harmful .... trucks, railroad trains, pipelines, or ships.

You’re not going to stop it’s extraction and use ... deal with it!

March 16, 2014 at 3:09 p.m.
PlainTruth said...
March 16, 2014 at 3:12 p.m.
wallyworld said...

No PT, I don't have to, they're doing a fine job of screwing themselves.

March 16, 2014 at 3:13 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

Now that you mention it, the environmental damage caused by tar sands extraction could well be considered like the rape of mother earth.

It is your country that is doing it ... you stinkin environmental terrorist!!

March 16, 2014 at 3:14 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Inquiringmind, with all due respect, I am probably one of the most educated posters on this board.

And Maximus is the richest ... and that’s the way the internet rolls.

BTW ... Inquiringmind ... Gassy does have “due respect” for you, however just like the rest of us he just doesn’t think you are due any.

March 16, 2014 at 3:28 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

dude_abides said...

zableedofisterix said... "Instead of bitching about oil, enlighten me how it's going to be replaced in the near future?"

See how you lost yourself in that sentence? It started out being a demand and then suddenly became a question, right at the end! How does that happen? It might be part of the reason you don't understand what words like conservative mean.

dude_abides said...

Plain-Truth hyphenates hoi polloi. He can be so ab-struse.

LMFAO !! ... pity the poor “pedantically” obsessed pseudo-intellectual “nit-picking” unemployable “fastidious” English major

March 16, 2014 at 3:53 p.m.
Maximus said...

The only thing the government wants to drill is your wallet.

March 16, 2014 at 3:53 p.m.
nucanuck said...

The world doesn't have to run out of oil for the problem to arise. The day that finite supply can no longer meet world demand, all hell breaks out. Oil becomes war among nations. Exporters may not wish to export. Imbalances will occur and the US is a major importer. Business won't do well in that environment. Those who can live with less oil in their lives will become the new winners.

March 16, 2014 at 4:01 p.m.
facyspacy said...

Thanks to the lefties that posted yesterday about what they don't like about Obama.

"I just putted out on 18 at the honors .... I'm going to dinner at Ruth's Chris @8:30." Lol

March 16, 2014 at 4:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

The US exported more oil the last couple of years than it imported.

That’s some pretty ignorant B.S. from someone so highly educated.

There is after all a ban on the export of U.S. produced crude oil and this country still imports about 40% of our crude oil needs. We do export some of the refined by-products of our and imported crude oil but that’s not what you said ... was it?

March 16, 2014 at 4:16 p.m.
jesse said...

SH!T I just got back from Augusta,Ga, Had a special permit to play Augusta National yesterday! played 18 w/2 buds and Arnie! Beat Arnie by 2 strokes!!Stopped in Atlanta to pick up my mega mill.lotto winnings!

Last liar ALWAYS lies biggest!!

March 16, 2014 at 4:17 p.m.
nucanuck said...

That's good to hear, facy, you are obviously quite self-important.

March 16, 2014 at 4:20 p.m.
alprova said...

Z-man wrote: "We'd be nothing without oil."

Well guess what you simple-minded fool? People are finding ways to adapt to an oil-free existence. You can jump on board or be left out in the cold.

March 16, 2014 at 4:21 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Jt, the US is a net importer of oil, still about 7 million barrels a day short of self sufficiency. The US will NEVER be oil independent without slashing consumption.

March 16, 2014 at 4:24 p.m.
fairmon said...

Gauss...

An excess of oil in the world will drive prices down. The U.S. could export more and it would still be cheaper due to demand being less than the supply. notice how much cheaper lettuce is when the product is large and good quality but more costly when the heads are small and poorer quality....the law of supply and demand at work. you are too young to ever have seen it without government intervention in the free markets.

March 16, 2014 at 4:55 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Fairmon, I know all about supply and demand. There simply is not enough oil in the US to describe the "excess" needed to drive down the price. Canada has plenty of oil, have you checked the price of a litre of gas for our northern neighbors?

"That’s some pretty ignorant B.S. from someone so highly educated."

Jt, not that an arrogant prick such as yourself would admit that you are wrong, but you are wrong:

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/02/us-exported-more-gasoline-than-imported-last-year/1#.UyYUOUtX_Ww

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29/u-s-was-net-oil-product-exporter-in-2011.html

And there are countless others for your viewing pleasure...

"And Maximus is the richest ... and that’s the way the internet rolls."

I will post pics of my degrees, get Max to post his W2 or a paystub.

March 16, 2014 at 5:23 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Now Jt, this is the second verifiable time that I have proved you are wrong.

March 16, 2014 at 5:27 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Hey Gassy, no one but you gives a shiznit about your degrees, pal.

March 16, 2014 at 5:28 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Hey Truth, this is the first time I have mentioned anything about my degrees. Say something to that pinhead JT. InquiringMind challenged my education, I backed it up and didn't say another word about it until Jt decided to run his smart mouth.

March 16, 2014 at 5:31 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo earps "People are finding ways to adapt to an oil-free existence. You can jump on board or be left out in the cold." Don't look now, melonhead, but that keyboard you abuse is made of petroleum by-products…as are the plastic containers your cakes and pies come in.

March 16, 2014 at 5:31 p.m.
alprova said...

Maximyth wrote: "To a hard working, responsible, patriotic, American the pipeline represents economic progress, jobs, and $1.00 a gallon. For muscle car owners like myself bring on the pipeline so we can tell the Saudi's to go furck themselves!"

This is the statement of s total idiot. If you would take a minute to educate yourself, you would understand that not one pint of what would be flowing through that pipeline will ever be refined and make it's way to a gasoline pump in the United States.

So pray tell how gasoline is going to go down to a buck a gallon?

Are you even remotely aware ho prices for gas are set? Of course you aren't.

Your so stupid that you repeat what the Republican politicians keep telling you, and you lap it up like a kitten does milk.

Sir, the only muscle car you may actually own sits on a shelf and is about 1/20th scale, and it gets fantastic gas mileage since you never drive it.

Makes perfect sense to me, as your brain appears to be about the same scale as your imaginary muscle car.

March 16, 2014 at 5:32 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

From Dec 25, 2008

"National average price for unleaded gas hits $1.648, says AAA, falling nearly 60% from this summer's record highs."

http://money.cnn.com/2008/12/25/news/economy/gas_prices/index.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fmoney_news_economy+(Economy+News)

As fot the unemployment number. In December of 2008 it was 7.3%.

That was the highest of the eight years of Bush. For most of his presidency it hoovered between 5.4 and 4.6%.

Gassy's having a coronary over here. It was only over 7% for one month of Bush's 96 months in office. How terrible.

March 16, 2014 at 5:33 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

The windmills are killing more birds than ever. Solar panel manufacturing uses materials of extremely high toxicity.

Whats so "green" about any of those?

March 16, 2014 at 5:39 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Toes, I wasn't harping on the employment numbers, I was harping on your mention of the price of gas under Bush right as he was leaving office, yet you didn't mention gas was 4.00 a gallon a few months before that. As a matter of fact, I didn't mention employment numbers at all.

March 16, 2014 at 5:40 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"SH!T I just got back from Augusta,Ga, Had a special permit to play Augusta National yesterday! played 18 w/2 buds and Arnie! Beat Arnie by 2 strokes!!"

Jesse, that's way more believable than anything Maxipad has posted lately.

March 16, 2014 at 5:43 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Whether or not the oil stays here or not isn't the main issue. If oil produced in North-America is to flow into the world market, that would take much of the power away from not-so-friendly oil producing countries which have controlled the price of gas for decades. If they wanted higher prices, they produced less. And when they see countries starting to talk about drilling their own, they produce more to ease the worry.

They've been playing this game since the late '40's. The environmental nut cases have blocked every attempt to build new refineries making the cost of producing gas even more expensive.

March 16, 2014 at 5:52 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

The price came down while Bush was still in office. Hasn't budged with Obama at the helm.

March 16, 2014 at 5:54 p.m.
alprova said...

Maximyth wrote: "...the company I own does do a LOT of business with Pilot and the Haslam boys. Good people."

Ah...another plank to add to your massive resume of businesses you claim to own.

I just figured out what you do for a living. You drive a truck. And the old saying goes that you can tell when a truck driver is lying. It's when his lips are moving.

In your case, it is when your fingers are moving as well.

So...and to update;

12/02/2012 @ 1:42 pm - "Jesse, used to own three businesses now I'm just an independent investor"

Three days later you posted this;

12/5/2102 @ 1:54 pm - "I mentioned earlier that my three food businesses are thriving right now selling cheap food to those living primarily on welfare."

11 days later, you posted this one;

12/16/2012 @ 2:00 pm - "my MBA has an emphasis in healthcare management and I own three healthcare affiliated businesses across four states."

11 days later, you posted;

12/27/2012 @ 11:51 pm - "ever heard of Little Debbie Snack Cakes?....yea, its a family business."

When called on that one, you retorted;

12/28/2012 @ 10:42 am - "I never said I work at McKee Bakeries, i.e. Little Debbie, I do business with Little Debbie."

25 days later, it was;

1/23/2013 @ 2:02 pm - "I just got back from a meeting with my contracting company. We are going to be bidding on some of the hurricane clean up work contracts in New Jersey in order to get in on the gold mine of tax payer money."

Then?

6/19/2013 @ 6:36 pm - "My companies have contracts with all three sectors of government accounts along with private sector industries like VW."

6/19/2013 @ 9:26 pm - "the Mercedes plant in Bama is a customer of mine"

And today, it was;

3/16/2014 @ 1:38 pm - “...the company I own does do a LOT of business with Pilot and the Haslam boys. Good people.”

You're the most pathetic liar I have ever encountered.

March 16, 2014 at 5:55 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"The price came down while Bush was still in office. Hasn't budged with Obama at the helm."

Honestly Toes, why do you think the price came down so drastically at the end of Bush's term?

March 16, 2014 at 5:59 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

For the same reason you think it went up.

March 16, 2014 at 6:02 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Jt, not that an arrogant prick such as yourself would admit that you are wrong, but you are wrong:

Yeah Right!!

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/02/us-exported-more-gasoline-than-imported-last-year/1#.UyYUOUtX_Ww

From your link - “United States exported more gasoline, heating oil and diesel fuel last year than it imported’ - didn’t say anything about crude oil.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29/u-s-was-net-oil-product-exporter-in-2011.html

Same to same.

After all you did say:

GaussianInteger said...

The US exported more “oil” the last couple of years than it imported.

That’s some pretty ignorant B.S. from someone so highly educated.

There is after all a “ban on the export of U.S. crude oil” and this country still “imports about 40% of our crude oil”. We do “export some of the refined by-products” of our and imported crude oil but “that’s not what you said ... was it?”

March 16, 2014 at 6:07 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

At any rate, can you deny that the more oil produced in regions outside the middle east the less vulnerable we would be to their ebb and flow production style?

March 16, 2014 at 6:09 p.m.
alprova said...

GaussianInteger wrote: "Now Jt, this is the second verifiable time that I have proved you are wrong."

I hope you're not going to be keeping count of the times the witch is wrong, 'cause you'll eventually lose count.

Take close note of the fact that she NEVER offers a retraction or an apology when proven wrong too. She simply moves on to the next attack post and never looks back.

That one is definitely a legend in her own mind and the most anti-social creature ever to pop out.

I'm bettin' she slapped her mother on the way out.

March 16, 2014 at 6:09 p.m.
conservative said...

Big bottled water must laugh all the way to the bank. The Liberals have scared themselves silly about chlorine so they buy their water in plastic bottles made from petroleum which they also hate.

March 16, 2014 at 6:13 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Admit you were wrong Jt. At this point, you are only making yourself look dumber.

March 16, 2014 at 6:19 p.m.
alprova said...

Jack the resident Curmudgeon chimed in with: "Don't look now, melonhead, but that keyboard you abuse is made of petroleum by-products…as are the plastic containers your cakes and pies come in."

Number one, I don't eat cakes and pies, and;

Number two, I'm quite sure that someone out there is working on an alternative to petroleum based plastics, just are many others are working to provide alternatives for everything else using fossil fuels in their creation.

Eventually, and it may not be in any of our lifetimes, the millionaires and the billionaires of the future will not be engaged in the production of oil.

They will be the innovators will one day free the world from the dependency of oil.

March 16, 2014 at 6:21 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Alpo says: "They will be the innovators will one day free the world from the dependency of oil."

And they, too, will be ostracized and attacked by the left when they receive compensation for their investments and hard work.

March 16, 2014 at 6:36 p.m.

TOES, very good. That last statement is exactly what will happen.

Bitchy, whiney, terminally unhappy, spoiled, jealous, controlling libs now and in the future will always be the same.

It's a damn good thing we have oil, and it's a good dependency. Only libs would put down something that they've benefited from and has made their lives so much better. "dependency" Idiocy.

Why not bitch about the pipes that keeps water flowing in your house, or the building a store is located in, or shelter, or dental floss, or toothpaste, or any other of the piles of things we depend on.

We'll never be free of oil because it has a zillion uses, not just for cars or planes.

March 16, 2014 at 6:52 p.m.

You mean you don't eat them anymore.

March 16, 2014 at 6:53 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes wrote: "And they, too, will be ostracized and attacked by the left when they receive compensation for their investments and hard work."

You offer this as if there's san ounce of truth to it. There isn't.

People who relate absolutes when referring to groups of people often wind up relating untruthful statements. Yours is a perfect example.

There are many fine Democrat entrepreneurs as well as capitalists, such as myself for example. We love earning money.

It's what some do with their "hard earned" money that irks some people. When it is used to attempt to influence elections, it can become problematic.

Corporations, usually in the hand of Republican cheerleaders, are bundlers of funds used to sway elections.

Then came Barrack Obama. He proved to the American people that you can win an election by increasing the number of people who contribute to the cause, without resorting to ONLY relying on big donations.

It has resounded with Democrats all over the country. Three bucks here and ten bucks there adds up REAL quick.

Currently, the money languishing in bank accounts which will be used to promote Democratic candidates far outweighs that which the Republicans seem to have.

Too bad...so sad. It really sucks to be a Republican these days, doesn't it?

March 16, 2014 at 7:08 p.m.
nucanuck said...

fairmon, you are one who usually has pretty good information, but you are behind the curve on oil supply and demand. Most of the older oil fields in the world are now in decline, producing less each year. Some former exporting countries are now net importers with more getting close. Saudi Arabia is either at peak production or giving a fairly good imitation. Iraq is the one bright spot in conventional oil. Brazil's big off-shore reserves have bankrupted one company and Petrobras is moving very cautiously. The oil is going to cost too much to produce at this time.

Tight oil is a short term event that only gives us a few more years to prepare for a decline in worldwide supply.

There are some good web sites with non-political engineers discussing real facts about world oil supplies. Read up a bit and you will realize how difficult the world of oil is becoming. The story is a lot bigger than world resources vs world demand. Resources aren't reserves and reserves aren't necessarily economic. We are within five years of real problems for world oil supply, unless demand falls for some reason.

March 16, 2014 at 7:11 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Why not bitch about the pipes that keeps water flowing in your house, or the building a store is located in, or shelter, or dental floss, or toothpaste, or any other of the piles of things we depend on."

All of those things can (and many are) be made without any fossil fuel by-products.

"And they, too, will be ostracized and attacked by the left when they receive compensation for their investments and hard work."

There are plenty of millionaires/billionaires that are democrats. You're attempting to make a strawman argument that has no merit to this topic.

March 16, 2014 at 7:19 p.m.

Alprova, you're insane. BO proved only that a vacant, anti-American with no resume could win an election with the help of the media. If he were white, he wouldn't have been allowed into the convention. He's a fraud, and still is. Only a BO worshiper like you could still be propping up this stiff this late in the game.

Corporations feed Democrats just as much. Liar.

March 16, 2014 at 7:20 p.m.

Alprova, you just go with the person, or party, that will give you the most stuff for free and take care of your ass.

March 16, 2014 at 7:25 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Zab, there is no argument about the importance of oil in modern culture. The very real question is how long we can produce enough to meet demand. The developing world is racing ahead with demand and production is showing serious signs of faltering. Any world supply shortfall would be very disruptive to world markets. A permanent shortfall of just a few percent would be enough to quickly change our living patterns. We got a sample of that during the artificial shortage imposed by the Arabs in 1973.

March 16, 2014 at 7:26 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Admit you were wrong Jt. At this point, you are only making yourself look dumber.

LMFAO !! ... at one of the most educated loons on the web site.

March 16, 2014 at 7:27 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Alpo blathers:

"You offer this as if there's san ounce of truth to it. There isn't."

You libs are all too predictable.

"It's what some do with their "hard earned" money that irks some people. When it is used to attempt to influence elections, it can become problematic."

Such as Soros, Buffett, Solyndra bundlers,.............and many more.

That's a flat-out lie. Right out of your ass.

"It has resounded with Democrats all over the country. Three bucks here and ten bucks there adds up REAL quick."

University of California $1,799,460 Goldman Sachs $1,034,615 Harvard University $900,909 Microsoft Corp $854,717 JPMorgan Chase & Co $847,895 Google Inc $817,855 Citigroup Inc $755,057 US Government $638,335 Time Warner $617,844 Sidley Austin LLP $606,260 Stanford University $603,866 National Amusements Inc $579,098 Columbia University $570,839 Skadden, Arps et al $554,439 WilmerHale Llp $554,373 US Dept of Justice $540,636 IBM Corp $534,470 UBS AG $534,166 General Electric $532,031 Morgan Stanley $528,182

Another fat ass lie.

"Currently, the money languishing in bank accounts which will be used to promote Democratic candidates far outweighs that which the Republicans seem to have."

It didn't help in Fla.13. Sink got sunk even with a bigger bank roll. The dems thought they were going to win it and lost anyway.

Obamcare is going to kill you dems.

It must suck to be a democrat these days, doesn't it?

March 16, 2014 at 7:37 p.m.
jesse said...

AL, Truck drivers may be bad BUT not as bad as used car salesmen!!I seem to remember reading about some of your family being truck drivers!!

BTW: check your email!

March 16, 2014 at 7:39 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo, the undisputed forum champion liar talks of truck drivers telling lies. Rich.

March 16, 2014 at 7:57 p.m.
alprova said...

Z-man wrote: "Alprova, you're insane. BO proved only that a vacant, anti-American with no resume could win an election with the help of the media."

You're entitled to any opinion you so desire, but the fact is that he outraised every Presidential candidate during both elections, and there is absolutely no comparison when it comes to the list of contributors to his campaigns.

"If he were white, he wouldn't have been allowed into the convention. He's a fraud, and still is. Only a BO worshiper like you could still be propping up this stiff this late in the game."

Again, you're entitled to your opinions, but it's hard not to notice that it's all about race with you. When you look at him, you don't see the man. You see a black man.

"Corporations feed Democrats just as much. Liar."

Proof? You challenged my statement, so cough up the proof.

Corporations absolutely contribute, by a wide margin, boatloads more to Republicans than to Democrats.

March 16, 2014 at 8:02 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Corporations absolutely contribute, by a wide margin, boatloads more to Republicans than to Democrats."

Any un-biased proof of that?

March 16, 2014 at 8:07 p.m.
alprova said...

Z-man wrote: "Alprova, you just go with the person, or party, that will give you the most stuff for free and take care of your ass."

Thank you, but I have my own criteria for selecting and supporting any candidate running for office, and I assure you that it is nowhere near what you are suggesting.

Contrary to your belief, I have EARNED every dollar I have ever put into my bank account.

Prior to my illness, I'll bet that I've paid more in taxes over my lifetime than you have grossed in pay.

I'm not about getting anything for free.

It's a shame that some of you claim to know a thing about me, when the fact is that none of you know me on any personal level.

When have you EVER seen me type in favor of receiving anything free?

March 16, 2014 at 8:09 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Anyone that says "I don't see color" is a certifiable liar.

March 16, 2014 at 8:10 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Again, alpo knows not of which he speaks:

"According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, business PACs gave 52% of their $72.2 million in total donations to Republican candidates from January through July."

"In the same period of 2009, corporate PACs had sent 59% of their $64 million in campaign contributions to Democratic candidates, according to the data. AT&T Corp. T +0.43% and GlaxoSmithKline GSK -0.24% PLC are among the companies whose PAC donations shifted this year toward GOP candidates."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703989304575503933125159928

Where's the "boatloads" and "wide margins" alpo?

A couple clicks is all it takes, right?

March 16, 2014 at 8:20 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

The dems wasted the monumental moment of the first half black president with a quasi-socialist liberal hack that turned out to be a dismal failure. Scores of other black men would have done better.

March 16, 2014 at 8:24 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes wrote: "Such as Soros, Buffett, Solyndra bundlers,.............and many more."

Did I state that there were NO rich Democrats, or examples that you could use to deflect from the truth I offered?

Your claim was that the left ostracizes and attacks those who receives compensation for their investments and hard work, and that is a provably false statement.

"University of California $1,799,460 Goldman Sachs $1,034,615 Harvard University $900,909 Microsoft Corp $854,717 JPMorgan Chase & Co $847,895 Google Inc $817,855 Citigroup Inc $755,057 US Government $638,335 Time Warner $617,844 Sidley Austin LLP $606,260 Stanford University $603,866 National Amusements Inc $579,098 Columbia University $570,839 Skadden, Arps et al $554,439 WilmerHale Llp $554,373 US Dept of Justice $540,636 IBM Corp $534,470 UBS AG $534,166 General Electric $532,031 Morgan Stanley $528,182"

No candidate has a longer list of individual donors than Barack Obama. None.

Your deflection by offering a small list of corporate donors does not make my statement any less true.

"Another fat ass lie."

You're free to believe it to be a lie, but I challenge you to prove it to be a lie.

"It didn't help in Fla.13. Sink got sunk even with a bigger bank roll. The dems thought they were going to win it and lost anyway."

No one expected a Democrat to win that election. A Republican won a Republican seat. It was noteworthy that the Democrat came very close to winning though. Very close.

The mid-terms are going to be very fun to watch. How many Republicans are going to have to stand up in front of a crowd, who will have absolutely nothing to offer potential voters as proof that they have been working in Washington?

And some of you have actually offered that the Republicans are going to take control of the Senate.

Delusional thinking, at best.

"Obamcare is going to kill you dems."

Do you really think so? It's been kinda quite for the last few weeks. ObamaCare is rollin' along just fine.

It's kinda like all those alleged scandals that have went exactly nowhere. All talk and no action. That's the state of the current Republican Party, and every American voter knows it too.

"It must suck to be a democrat these days, doesn't it?"

Not from my vantage point. The way I see things, we've been winning for five years and gettin' better all the time.

March 16, 2014 at 8:26 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Alpo also said: "Contrary to your belief, I have EARNED every dollar I have ever put into my bank account."

Not so. Without the government, you'd be broke. Remember? You didn't build that alpo. the government allowed you to have it.

March 16, 2014 at 8:28 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

"ObamaCare is rollin' along just fine."

Really? Did you just type that? BWHAAAAAHAAAAA!!

." The way I see things, we've been winning for five years and gettin' better all the time."

And that too? WOW!! You are one delusional cat.

March 16, 2014 at 8:33 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Baghdad Al says obamacare just rolling along.. Hahahaha

March 16, 2014 at 8:37 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes wrote: "Not so. Without the government, you'd be broke. Remember? You didn't build that alpo. the government allowed you to have it."

I'll never draw what I paid in, even if I live to be 100.

March 16, 2014 at 8:42 p.m.
alprova said...

Toes, my darling, you really need to read something before you offer it up as proof.

From the VERY FIRST sentence in that article;

"Corporations have begun to send a majority of donations from their political action committees to Republican candidates, a reversal from the trend of the past three years."

AND, the date of your article doesn't even begin to address the truth I offered in regard to this last election.

It was dated September 21, 2010.

But you keep tryin'...okay?

March 16, 2014 at 8:45 p.m.
alprova said...

It seems there are those who disagree with my statement that ObamaCare is rolling along just fine.

Can anyone point to so much as one public protest held by any group of public citizens?

Why even the Republicans in Congress have dropped voting to overturn ObamaCare.

Just as they do whenever Darrell Issa opens his mouth about a scandal, America is starting to yawn at any mention of ObamaCare. Millions are receiving insurance who did not have it, others have had their benefits IMPROVED as a result of ObamaCare, and we've got a long way to go 'til November.

By November, ObamaCare will not be even mentioned by a Republican candidate, for fear of putting the crowd to sleep, because the fact is that all these alleged millions of people who claim to have lost their insurance due to ObamaCare are not filling thre Faux News studios to offer their personal testimony.

I think Harry Reid was right.

Most of those making such claims are making it all up.

After all, not one person who posts in this forum has offered their own personal negative that can be tied to Obamacare.

I've been asking for months.

Regardless of anything and everything offered, the truth will stand when the world is on fire.

March 16, 2014 at 8:53 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"The dems wasted the monumental moment of the first half black president with a quasi-socialist liberal hack that turned out to be a dismal failure. Scores of other black men would have done better."

Let me guess: Dr. Ben Carson, Allen West, or Bobby Jindal?

March 16, 2014 at 8:55 p.m.
alprova said...

Oops!!! Bobby Jindal is not black. He's East Indian.

March 16, 2014 at 9 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

You're a lost soul alpo. Time for your meds.

March 16, 2014 at 9:12 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Either one is better than Obama. Hell, I'd even take the real first black president back. Billy Clinton.

March 16, 2014 at 9:15 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

A little racist of you gassy.

March 16, 2014 at 9:15 p.m.
facyspacy said...

I have many alprova.... I will tell you about two.

  1. My insurance. I got a cancellation notice. I had Humana. 2500 deductible, 0 drug deductible, 100% after the deductible is met. $35 copay for dr office. $75 emergency room copay. Told my insurance was cancelled because it doesn't have mental health or pregnancy coverage. I was paying $127 (I'm 35) now I have to pay $224

  2. My client. I sell many types of insurance as a broker. The family was with Blue cross. He had. $3500 deductible, 80/20 after the deductible was met. $25 copay. 8,000 max out of pocket. He had maternity benefits and his wife is currently pregnant and due in April. He got a cancelation letter in January because his insurance didn't cover mental health. He was paying $715, his new premium starting in August is $988, not including the newborn. His family clears $85,000 per yr. The premium is 14% of their income

I won't bore you with anymore stories. Fact is the old system sucked, and the new system is a catastrophe

March 16, 2014 at 9:18 p.m.
whatsnottaken said...

Only problem with this is Tooney's toilet is too far north and west. All the redneck criminals from your neck of the woods has turned the Bakken oil field in North Dakota into - well - the dirty south. We all carry guns here now cause of the southern invasion.

March 16, 2014 at 10:08 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

"The dems wasted the monumental moment of the first half black president with a quasi-socialist liberal hack that turned out to be a dismal failure. Scores of other black men would have done better."

Let me guess: Dr. Ben Carson, Allen West, or Bobby Jindal?

alprova said...

Oops!!! Bobby Jindal is not black. He's East Indian.

What makes you think you know better than Gassy ... after all he is one of the most educated posters here ... Right?

March 16, 2014 at 10:24 p.m.
nucanuck said...

WOW! You guys are paying a lot for health insurance. I pay $125 per month, total, for my wife and myself with no deductibles and no co-pay. Doctors and specialists are first rate, but I did have to wait six months for cataract surgery. Nothing is perfect and our taxes are somewhat higher, but we get good value for those taxes.

March 16, 2014 at 10:53 p.m.
facyspacy said...

Well Nuc, they save you pay by how much you make. Maximus's premium must be in the millions.

March 16, 2014 at 11:16 p.m.
nucanuck said...

My premiums aren't income based in any way.

March 17, 2014 at 12:08 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Canadian tar sands oil is so toxic that my Province, British Columbia, won't approve a pipeline across BC to the Pacific coast. If other Canadians don't want a pipeline, shouldn't that say something about whether the US should allow the same toxic product to cross the US to be shipped overseas?

March 17, 2014 at 12:49 a.m.
fairmon said...

GaussianInteger said...

Inquiringmind, with all due respect, I am probably one of the most educated posters on this board.

Education does not necessarily equal intelligence it only means one has obtained certificates suggesting they have successfully ingested some information in a limited field of learning. It is often correctly stated that common sense is not very common.

March 17, 2014 at 3:53 a.m.
fairmon said...

nucanuck....I have read the book "peak oil" which is now outdated. The author also sells a financial advice newsletter. Did you but it and follow the recommendations?

No doubt conservation is critical for various reasons but there is no reason for a lack of supply. There will be alternatives and they will come from private sector discoveries without government involvement until the government leaches the gains from those that fund the R&D and the eventual production.

North America has the capacity to starve other sources of oil and should do so.

March 17, 2014 at 4:01 a.m.
fairmon said...

Obamacare is unraveling like a cheap suit but republicans attacking the AHA without offering better alternatives will not win. Does it not concern anyone that the president can change the law in any way he chooses? Did congress abdicate responsibility and empower him to do so?

March 17, 2014 at 4:07 a.m.
Maximus said...

Wow! I got a bunch of folks worked up that have achieved very little success in their careers. We'll good, maybe they will start working twelve to fifteen hour days like myself and have either ownership or primary partnerships in several business enterprises including healthcare, food distribution, real estate, and janitorial supplies. Jealousy and envy are ugly sins, but of course I am accustomed to such silly behavior from those less fortunate, supposedly we'll educated, victims of circumstance such as Alprova and the 36 year old washout Gaushog. For me life is very good because I have been earning my success every day in the absolute greatest country in the world. Yes, I, like Rush Limbaugh and others get a kick out of tweaking the loser "Whole Foods" " Prius Driving" "Abortion Loving" "Gun Hating" "Obama Worshiping" girly men on this forum by talking about my fun lifestyle along with the possessions that I have earned. There is nothing leftist Democrats hate more, especially when they are well educated failures in our very competitive society, than a self made, wealthy, Christian but tough minded, Married, Father, and Business Man. An example of this attitude can be taken from a young man that I interviewed for a management position in my organization recently. He was in his late twenties with a newly minted MBA. Mid way through the first interview this candidate started making demands about the comp package that he "deserved". I had to tell him 3 things at that point....1. We do not discuss your comp package on the first interview. 2. Your comp package will not be based on your potential but on what day one skill sets you will bring to the table to help our team better serve our customers and grow our business. 3. I had to tell the well educated arrogant idiot that he would not be moved forward in my interview process. My point, "What you expect of yourself will be closely linked to what you accomplish." No politician or social justice welfare program will make YOU successful as a person, in your finances, or with your career......YOU determine your success whether you have a fancy degree or not. A degree might open a few doors for you as my MBA did, but after that it is up to YOU to execute and produce. Some people have it and some people don't. The sooner you realize that you don't "deserve" anything, the faster you will be on the right track to earning your place in life. That is how it works in the U.S.A. America, love it or leave it. Now I gotta go to work! Get dat money....yo!

March 17, 2014 at 7:09 a.m.
wallyworld said...

Koch Brothers Stand to Make $100 Billion From Keystone Pipeline Through their investments and various subsidiaries, Charles and David Koch could make a fortune from the transcontinental oil pipeline, contrary to previous Koch claims. The Koch brothers have become well known (and despised by many progressives) for their right-wing political activism. The International Forum on Globalization, has been studying Koch investments and properties, including 2 million acres of land in Alberta, Canada. The IFG also estimates that the Kochs have spent about $50 million lobbying pro-Keystone think tanks and members of Congress. The Keystone pipeline is supposed to bring synthetic crude oil from Canada all the way down to the Gulf Coast of the United States, where it would be refined. It has become something of a unifying cause for the environmental movement, which sees continued investment in fossil fuels as a calamitous proposition when we are already suffering the effects of climate change. And of course there’s no way to build a toxic tube across the continent without affecting the environment.

And fairmon, you'll have to tell me what AHA is, never heard of it. It concerns me that a majority win in an election does NOT allow you to put the majority's policies in place. Deeply concerns me -- that's not democracy.

March 17, 2014 at 7:10 a.m.
fairmon said...

AHA is affordable health care act. We are a republic, not a democracy. What majority policy has not been put in place? The system is designed to have checks and balances to avoid a majority dictating to a minority. Seems to be working since there is a nearly an equal divide of opinions regarding many issues. The republicans do not really oppose Obamacare or they would have withheld funding unless if was implemented as written and as scheduled which would have led to it's demise within a year or so.

Your speculative information regarding the Koch bro's is not from a reliable source. I am no fan of theirs or the republicans but they are maligned in an unfair way by those disagreeing with them while George Soros is in the background doing far more to advance his personal agenda.

March 17, 2014 at 8:10 a.m.
alprova said...

Maximyth wrote: "We'll good, maybe they will start working twelve to fifteen hour days like myself and have either ownership or primary partnerships in several business enterprises including healthcare, food distribution, real estate, and janitorial supplies."

That's your explanation for your dumping of lies into this forum?

You forgot to explain the very first statement you made to another poster in here, regarding how you made a living;

"Jesse, used to own three businesses now I'm just an independent investor"

"Jealousy and envy are ugly sins..."

Bearing false witness is addressed as one of the Ten Commandments, but that doesn't seem to be stopping you from consistently BRAGGING about things that only an idiot at this point and time would believe you own.

"...but of course I am accustomed to such silly behavior from those less fortunate, supposedly we'll educated, victims of circumstance such as Alprova and the 36 year old washout Gaushog."

The only thing silly going on here is your trying to hang on to a set of lies that a five year old would laugh at, knowing that you're full of it.

Your shining success and achievement in life probably centers around a lemonade stand you once had as a child, when the neighborhood gave you ten bucks on a Saturday afternoon.

Good times indeed, since it apparently spawned an overactive imagination which has been with you and will probably plague you for the rest of your life.

March 17, 2014 at 8:26 a.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "Your speculative information regarding the Koch bro's is not from a reliable source. I am no fan of theirs or the republicans but they are maligned in an unfair way by those disagreeing with them while George Soros is in the background doing far more to advance his personal agenda."

The irony in that paragraph is laughable.

Your sources regarding George Soros are far more credible than that which have digested what the Koch brothers are up to?

I had no idea you were a comedy writer.

March 17, 2014 at 8:34 a.m.
wallyworld said...

The Affordable Care Act aka ACA is the name of the Healthcare Act. So, why even have elections, if the winning party does not get to have their policies (that they campaigned on) put in place? I know we are a republic, but we also consider ourselves to have a democracy. The Encarta dictionary defines a democracy as "a system of government based on the principle of majority decision making.". I guess you never studied civics.

March 17, 2014 at 8:47 a.m.

Nobody cares about the Koch brothers, no matter how many times you libs bring them up.

It will have no influence on how anyone will vote in the 2014 mid-terms. Nobody cares. They will see, however, that they donated $100 million to build a new hospital wing in New York City. Nobody follows who they donate to.

You libs can bring up tar sands all you want, nearly 100% of voters don't give a crap. If the keystone pipeline has jobs associated with it, then that's what they'll care about it. They don't care about some piss ant lefty stamping his feet and soiling his diaper somewhere over the "raping of mother nature". "mother nature" is well looked after in this country, and you know it.

March 17, 2014 at 9:18 a.m.
facyspacy said...

nucanuck said... My premiums aren't income based in any way.

March 17, 2014 at 12:08 a.m. permalink suggest removal

Sounds like you are on a group plan that either you or your wife's co pays for a majority of your premium. To the a chunk of the people who are middle class, seen their hours reduced to part time, or have a small business, or are in sales, and are now forced to foot a 15-20% of their income as premium, now struggle to make ends meet

March 17, 2014 at 9:21 a.m.

Wally, are you an American? Geez.

March 17, 2014 at 9:27 a.m.
wallyworld said...

When George Bush invaded Iraq, his claim was he wanted to spread "democracy" all over the world. I never heard mention of spreading a republic. George Bush and Ronnie Reagan were the worst violators of our constitution EVER!

March 17, 2014 at 9:33 a.m.
wallyworld said...

to answer your stupid question, zabldedodo, I am an American citizen, served 20 years in the military, pay my taxes, vote, try to find out the truth of what's going on around me. zab, are you an idiot? Actually that last question was rhetorical.

March 17, 2014 at 9:36 a.m.

No, Wally, you're an idiot. Pointing out that you were in the military, which many of you liberals do, doesn't legitimize you're anti-American views. By your logic, whoever is in the White House should just be given a blank check to do what he wants because he was elected. There's a little thing called the House. Ever heard of it? There's a reason why we have a system of checks and balances. We have a Constitution. I know your dear leader, BO, isn't a fan, but it's there. This is a Republic. I know you're angry because BOscare isn't popular, and everyone doesn't just bend over and take it, but get over it. Your messiah has turned out to be turd. Deal with it.

March 17, 2014 at 9:48 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Koch boys = bad. Soros = good. puzzling

March 17, 2014 at 10:24 a.m.
nucanuck said...

facy, I am on a group plan with 33 million other Canadians. As I said, the premiums are quite low with no out-of-pocket costs or deductibles for the group members. The quality of care I have experienced meets or exceeds my US experiences and the medical community seems to be top notch. I would recommend it to all.

March 17, 2014 at 10:50 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Nuc: How many forums like this across the nation do you subscribe to?

March 17, 2014 at 10:52 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Maximouth,

The narcissistic persona you project immediately disqualifies you from achieving what truly successful people have…that of being a class act. All your money, all your things, they can't buy you class. You just don't have it, big boy…sorry about that.

March 17, 2014 at 11 a.m.
jesse said...

He ain't got any of that other sh!t he's always talkin about either nucanuk!

March 17, 2014 at 11:23 a.m.
nucanuck said...

fairmon,

I don't know the book to which you referred, but I began reading about peak oil sixteen years ago and I haven't stopped. I read a lot of esoteric stuff and often run into formulae and engineering speak that I can't cifer, but I trudge through it and get the thrust of the thinking. I think I am well self-schooled on energy matters, but of course we all think we know things that maybe we only partially understand.

As your polar opposite, I believe strongly that we are on the cusp of an energy constrained world, but I agree with you that there are still abundant resources in the ground. IMO, there is an economic and ecological confluence that is bearing down on us and can not be avoided. That confluence will radically alter how, and for what, we use oil going forward. Again, IMO, we are at the end of growth as we have known it and while there may still be a bit of growth here and there, we are headed toward a permanent contraction that will require an economic restructuring.

Right or wrong, my family and I have completely restructured our lives toward a low carbon future. We have done all of the easy things and we are progressing on the difficult things now. We chose our new location based on our view of where and what would be important to survive and thrive in a low energy use future. We are walking the walk, but it is a journey, not a day trip.

The first question we asked in preparing for a different future was: Where would you chose to live if you thought that you might never ever be able to leave? That question really focused our minds and made us examine our core values.

March 17, 2014 at 11:34 a.m.
nucanuck said...

PT,

This is the only forum that I frequent. It is a way to keep in touch with the thinking(?) in my home town.

March 17, 2014 at 11:41 a.m.

Nucanuck, you libs wouldn't recognize a narcissist if you he or she bit you in the ass. Your man in the WH, is the the ultimate narcissist.

March 17, 2014 at 11:41 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

nuc, why the ?

March 17, 2014 at 11:43 a.m.

"low carbon future".. stop inhaling and exhaling then, the ultimate sacrifice to your god, "mother nature"

March 17, 2014 at 11:51 a.m.
GaussianInteger said...

""mother nature" is well looked after in this country, and you know it."

Oh yeah, Fister? What about the recent ash spill in WV? What about the ash spill near Kingston, TN? What about the mercury spill in Meigs County? What about the tar sands spill in the Kalamazoo River? The list could go on forever.

March 17, 2014 at 11:55 a.m.

Yeah, Gauss, let's sound the alarm. Ever heard of EPA? Being a liberal, you should be familiar with it. It's a big country, man, nothing is perfect. In fact the EPA is very much used as a weapon by the left/BO.

A man in Wyoming is being fined $75k a day by the EPA for building a pond on his property.

Did mommy nature get a boo boo? I'll kiss it and make it better.

March 17, 2014 at 12:08 p.m.
nucanuck said...

PT, the ? represents the obvious fact that many if not most of the comments here are clutter...fun stuff…not thinking.

March 17, 2014 at 12:09 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

nuc: Ex Pats are usually critical of their former homes, no?

March 17, 2014 at 12:09 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

nuc, 12:09. Based on what? Your views?

March 17, 2014 at 12:12 p.m.
nucanuck said...

PT, I love my former home and miss my friends from there, but that doesn't mean that there aren't many things worthy of criticism…and praise in Chattanooga. Littlefield disgusted me, Berke seems to be doing a good job. I hate the summer heat in Chattanooga. I am very proud of the changes in Chattanooga since the late 1970s. That has been quite a story and I got to live in and among the middle of those changes.

Nationally, I think Obama has done a poor job, but still probably better than had McCain been elected. Neither was Romney clearly better in the policy areas that I think matter most. I don't see any real difference between the parties in foreign and economic policy. Once in office they both do about the same thing but with slightly different emphasis.

I suspect that we all know the US is badly off course, but so is the financial structure of the whole developed world. We know that what can't be sustained, won't last. We just don't know how long before the fall. We also know that finite resources can't last forever, but we can't even allow our minds to begin to think about life with less than we are now accustomed to.

We are due for a deep worldwide depression about now…will we get it? Will that depression lead to the changes that might put things in a better balance? We can only hope for the best and take what comes.

March 17, 2014 at 12:49 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

nuc. fair enough. not sure how Romney could not done a better job than the present leader. But what the hell? I heart Canada and enjoy the occasional Labatt Blue. 🍀

March 17, 2014 at 12:53 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Anatomy of a Democratic Midterm Freakout

"National Democrats are in a near panic — if the media's highly-attuned panic detectors are any indicator — with a "poisonous" president unable to use his popularity to sway voters, a "screaming siren" warning about mid-term turnout, and Republicans on the offensive on Obamacare. There are a long eight months until November, but Democrats seem unlikely to get much sleep over the interim."

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/03/anatomy-democratic-midterm-freakout/359229/

March 17, 2014 at 1:04 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

Canadian tar sands oil is so toxic that my Province, British Columbia, won't approve a pipeline across BC to the Pacific coast. If other Canadians don't want a pipeline, shouldn't that say something about whether the US should allow the same toxic product to cross the US to be shipped overseas?

This is typical of what you regularly post, in that you provide a lot of opinion but little or no backup.

Since 2012 your province has no authority to approve or disapprove of the pipeline. Due to changes made in 2012 to Canada’s Environmental Assessment Act, the final decision on the Northern Gateway pipeline rests with your Federal Cabinet. Your National Energy Board has approved the pipeline project and the Federal Cabinet has until the middle of June to give final approval.

Most likely they will do so since the XL pipeline is being held up by Obama. They need an outlet for their oil and the U.S. is not a dependable partner under our present regime. The oil will be sent to foreign countries with less environmental regulations and result in even more environmental damage than if the oil was used here.

Enjoy the gigantic oil tankers crashing on your beautiful shore line.. Congratulations on that result.

March 17, 2014 at 1:17 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

^So I guess that means you'd rather have them crash into our "beautiful shore line"?

March 17, 2014 at 1:20 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Did mommy nature get a boo boo? I'll kiss it and make it better."

Just go take a swim in that WV river I referred to; or get you a glass of water from the tap of a home whose water is supplied by that river.

March 17, 2014 at 1:23 p.m.
ibshame said...

"TOES02800 said... Anatomy of a Democratic Midterm Freakout"

Until Nate Silver tells the Dems they are definitely going to lose the Senate the Dems have zilch to worry about. He was the one Turdblossom Rove and the rest of the crew dismissed as having flawed data when he predicted President Obama would be re-elected to a second term. LOL

March 17, 2014 at 1:24 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

ibeshamed = the indoctrinated. sad.

March 17, 2014 at 1:36 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Jt,

The Feds still have to deal with the First Nation tribes and that is not going well.

Also a presumed majority in left leaning BC oppose the pipeline which also adds doubt to the final outcome.

The Feds may be able to cram the pipeline down the throats of the people, but that is far from certain.

May we assume that you prefer strong central government forcing policy against the will of the people?

March 17, 2014 at 1:45 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Never been a fan of Rove. The dems won't lose because establishment republicans say so. They'll lose because of low voter turnout and their part in Obamacare.

No matter how much money they have and spend, they can't walk back the lie they told and perpetuated on the American people (yes, even democrat voters are feeling the lie of Obamacare) . The great Obama turned out to be a huge liability for the dems.

Obama lied about it 28 times on national television. You can't say it was a slip of the tongue or "taken out of context".

March 17, 2014 at 1:46 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

nuc says The Feds may be able to cram the pipeline down the throats of the people, but that is far from certain.

May we assume that you prefer strong central government forcing policy against the will of the people? Like Obamacare? Like that?

March 17, 2014 at 1:53 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Russian State Media: "Russia could turn US into radioactive ash." Man, that Romney was way off base, eh?

March 17, 2014 at 2:06 p.m.
ibshame said...

"TOES02800 said... The dems won't lose because establishment republicans say so. They'll lose because of low voter turnout and their part in Obamacare.

Low voter turnout maybe, but if I was a betting person, this time around with the approval rating of the U.S. Congress being less than that of President Obama, (in fact at one point the lowest in the history of Congress) I wouldn't start the celebration too soon for the Repubs.

Unlike his predecessor, George W. Bush not one single life has been lost due to Obamacare.

The same cannot be said for all the times Bush lied about WMD's in Iraq and the cost of those lies in term of human loss and the damage done to the economy of the United States. When Obamacare reaches that level of destruction then you can talk about how President Obama lied on national T.V.

Bush Lies about WMD's:

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

United Nations address, September 12, 2002

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."

Radio address, October 5, 2002

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."

"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" -- his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

Cincinnati, Ohio speech, October 7, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

Address to the nation, March 17, 2003

ALL LIES

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/

March 17, 2014 at 2:13 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Shame never misses an opportunity to Bush bash.

"However, FactCheck.org of the left-of-center Annenberg Foundation cites a different story."

"As cited, although found after-the-fact to be at least partially incorrect, the intelligence President Bush had in regards to Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) was shared with the U.S. Congress":

"The CIA and most other US intelligence agencies believed before the war that Saddam had stocks of biological and chemical weapons, was actively working on nuclear weapons and 'probably' would have a nuclear weapon before the end of this decade.

That faulty intelligence was shared with Congress – along with multiple mentions of some doubts within the intelligence community – in a formal National Intelligence Estimate just prior to the Senate and House votes to authorize the use of force against Iraq." Fact Check went on to state:

"No hard evidence has surfaced to support claims that Bush somehow manipulated the findings of intelligence analysts.

In fact, two [Congressional] bipartisan investigations probed for such evidence and said they found none."

March 17, 2014 at 2:30 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

The biological weapons most likely moved to Syria. Where they're now not being removed.

March 17, 2014 at 2:33 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

From the same article:

Democrats Clamor For War...

A number of Democrats were ringing the warning bells of Saddam Hussein's quest for WMD's long before 9/11 or the Bush presidency.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." — President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998 "Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 Post 9/11 Democrats Call For War...

A few examples of the call for war on the left-side of the aisle include:

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002 "It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security." — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

If you have evidence that Bush did this all on his own shame, please share.

March 17, 2014 at 2:33 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

PT's right. Clinton gave saddam years to move his WMD's. Remember all the times Saddam kicked the inspectors out of Iraq? Clinton did nothing but acquiesce. Fearful of stirring up his anti-war base prior to re-erection(sic).

March 17, 2014 at 2:41 p.m.

Funny how libs continually point out how stupid Bush was, yet they insist he was clever enough to fool everyone with his "lies". Which is it? Bush couldn't have done anything without Congress, and the UN, as well. BO is the one who has done things unilaterally internationally and is always beating his chest about doing what he wants without consulting anyone. More projection from the left.

March 17, 2014 at 2:58 p.m.
ibshame said...

"TOES02800 said... Shame never misses an opportunity to Bush bash"

You are so right and I never will. You should understand that as much as wingnuts and teabaggers bash President Obama.

As stated from the cnn article posted:

"Presidential statements, particularly on matters of national security, are held to an expectation of the highest standard of truthfulness. A president cannot stretch, twist or distort facts and get away with it. President Lyndon Johnson's distortions of the truth about Vietnam forced him to stand down from reelection. President Richard Nixon's false statements about Watergate forced his resignation."

As far as the Dems who voted for the war, they were just as wrong to do so as the Repubs. However, at the time most were so afraid they would be seen as TRAITORS, AND UNAMERICAN. Or they would be demonized like Max Clelland of Georgia. A disabled vet who was accused of being a Bin Laden supporter because he dared to question the war.

Bush may not have done all on his own but as stated he shares the greatest blame because as President of the United States he is held to a higher standard. Surely, wingnuts and teabaggers understand that.

March 17, 2014 at 3:11 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

We are due for a deep worldwide depression about now…will we get it? Will that depression lead to the changes that might put things in a better balance?

I can see you now in your sackcloth and ashes wearing a sandwich board that says “The End Is Near”, all the while smiling from ear to ear.

March 17, 2014 at 3:23 p.m.
ibshame said...

President Clinton did not invade Iraq. It was George W. Bush and his neocon buddies that convinced the wingnuts of this country Iraq had WMD's. However, when that was proven to be a lie, the real truth of the whole thing was finally exposed as a quest for CONTROL OF THE OIL RICH FIELDS OF IRAQ.

Unfortunately, over 4000 U.S. soldiers died for that quest and instead of 'Mission Accomplished' it was Mission FAILED.

March 17, 2014 at 3:23 p.m.
ibshame said...

"PlainTruth said... The biological weapons most likely moved to Syria. Where they're now not being removed."

You have about as much proof of that as you do a leprechaun is going to visit your house tonight and tell you where to find that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

March 17, 2014 at 3:30 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

Jt, The Feds still have to deal with the First Nation tribes and that is not going well.

But B.C. provincial government can’t block it .... as you claimed

Also a presumed majority in left leaning BC oppose the pipeline which also adds doubt to the final outcome.

See above

The Feds may be able to cram the pipeline down the throats of the people, but that is far from certain.

See above

May we assume that you prefer strong central government forcing policy against the will of the people?

No You May ... Not !! .... just pointing out your B.S. lie about the B.C. government being legally able to block the pipeline.

March 17, 2014 at 3:38 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

There is no fossil fuel dirtier than tar sands oil

You keep posting that but never a link to some study that says so and to what degree.

The paradox is that the Keystone pipeline would actually raise the price that Americans pay for oil by reducing the backlog/excess of oil at the Cushing Oklahoma distribution point.

I thought the price of oil was set on the world market and I don’t know anybody that buys crude oil retail. We typically buy products made from such oil.

limric said... “Tar sands crude will have no effect on the price of heating oil, jetA, gasoline etc. and very little economic (ie.jobs) impact.”

Alpo said ... “tar sand pipelines, which do nothing for the price of a gallon of gas at the pump in this area of the world”

GaussianInteger said... “A pipeline is not going to change what we pay at the pump other than maybe a few cents”

The Keystone would allow tar sands oil to flow straight to the Gulf coast for export and thereby allow Canada to sell/export it's oil for a much higher price based on world Bent oil prices.

Wouldn’t releasing backlog or excess oil onto the world market have the effect of lowering prices?

Why is Canada and oil companies building a pipeline to Texas just to put the oil on tankers and export it? Wouldn’t it be cheaper to build as pipeline to their west coast which would be much shorter? It couldn’t be that the oil is going to be refined in Texas with the by-products sold domestically and then the excess products exported for sell?

The reduced oil backlog in the US would likely allow US oil prices to rise back to world prices, costing all Americans more at the pump.

See above

March 17, 2014 at 4:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

What possible benefit would the United States receive from toxic oil that is pumped through our lands that cannot ever be refined to be allowed to burn in so much as one American vehicle?

A B.S. Lie

By Christopher Helman, www.forbes.com>

Over the past decade (before the shale oil boom) refiners spent tens of billions to optimize their plants based on the assumption that their crude oil supplies would be getting heavier and more sour — like Canadian oil sands or heavy oil from Venezuela and Mexico.

fairmon said...

alprova...do the research you claim to be so good and accurate at doing regarding Soros and the Koch's. Don't rely on those under Soros control which are many. The largest contributions flowing to either party comes from unions.

The Kock's have little political influence and certainly no one inside the administration.

March 17, 2014 at 4:33 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

limric said...

There is another equally important pipeline. The Enbridge Line9 from Montreal to Portland Maine is due to be reversed to carry tar sands crude to S. Portland for tanker export.

Exactly ... The Canadian oil sands are going to find an outlet either the XL, the Western coast pipeline or this one on the East coast. The oil is going to be used and there is no doubt about it so wouldn’t it be economically and environmentally better for it to be processed, transported and used in this country rather than shipped to countries with less regulations?

March 17, 2014 at 4:52 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Jt: No, that makes too much sense.

March 17, 2014 at 4:55 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

NEW YORK (AP) — The universe was born almost 14 billion years ago, exploding into existence in an event called the Big Bang. Now researchers say they've spotted evidence that a split-second later, the expansion of the cosmos began with a powerful jump-start.

will need either Gassy or lkeithlu to explain to me.

March 17, 2014 at 5:01 p.m.

"as president of the United States he is held to a higher standard" You mean like Benghazi, Libya and Egypt?

March 17, 2014 at 5:02 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Jt,

The BC First Nations Tribes have been able to block the pipeline so far. Will they crumble? So far, money has not been their issue. Ottawa tries to keep changing the rules and laws in order to force the pipeline. The more important point is that the majority of BC residents don't want the toxic tar sands product flowing through BC or fouling their coastline while you apparently think a pipeline would be good for your US neighbors. Curious, the different thinking.

The reason the Keystone pipeline would tend to raise US prices is that by eliminating the current surplus (read over-supply) in the central US (Cushing Oklahoma), US prices would tend to rise back in line with world prices (Brent) where they used to be, pre-surplus. (I guess that I just thought you would know that/remember that.) Certainly the Brent price could be lowered at the margin, but not by much because of the tiny ratio of new oil to the world price. Net Net, the US would pay more.

You are right about me not being able to prove Tar Sands oil to be the dirtiest of all fossil fuels. I have read that statement so often in so many places that I just assumed it to be true. Would you please tell us the real truth?

March 17, 2014 at 5:04 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

wallyworld said...

I know all the people you listen to daily think it is 'cute' to use the noun (democrat) when the adjective is required before party, i.e. democratic party is made up of democrats.

i.e. Republicanic Party is made up of Republicans?

From Wiki

The use of a noun as a modifier of another noun is not grammatically incorrect in modern English in the formation of a compound noun, e.g., "shoe store," "school bus," "peace movement," etc. The use of nouns as adjectives is part of a broader linguistic trend, according to language expert Ruth Walker, who claims, "We're losing our inflections—the special endings we use to distinguish between adjectives and nouns, for instance. There's a tendency to modify a noun with another noun rather than an adjective. Some may speak of "the Ukraine election" rather than 'the Ukrainian election' or 'the election in Ukraine,' for instance. It's 'the Iraq war' rather than 'the Iraqi war,' to give another example."

The Fleabaggeric Party’s skin is so thin you can actually see they have no guts ... LMFAO!!

March 17, 2014 at 5:18 p.m.

Hey, Wally, it will always be the Democrat Party to me.

March 17, 2014 at 5:23 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Jt, if my prior post about how my family lives gave you the impression that we are living a bare bones existence, I apologize. We live quite well and even though we have made lifestyle changes, we have a quality of life that few can rival. We are surrounded by beauty at every turn. We live in a wonderful climate with a little too much dampness for three months followed by near perfection. The deer in the garden are maddening, but we will have a deer fence up by the end of the week. There are very few biting bugs here…don't need screens. Well educated people from every corner of the earth help with a broader understanding of universal issues. No creationists, no climate change deniers..yep, we've got it pretty good.

March 17, 2014 at 5:29 p.m.

Strange that you're man in office doesn't respect our democratic process, Wally. We participate through our elected representatives, that's our democratic process. Maybe you should move to country where whoever wins the presidency gets to impose whatever laws he wants, and does whatever he wants. I think that's a dictatorship. You can follow Obutthead to another country where he can have his way.

March 17, 2014 at 5:33 p.m.
facyspacy said...

nucanuck said...

facy, I am on a group plan with 33 million other Canadians. As I said, the premiums are quite low with no out-of-pocket costs or deductibles for the group members. The quality of care I have experienced meets or exceeds my US experiences and the medical community seems to be top notch. I would recommend it to all.

I didn't know you lived in British Columbia. Yes your premiums are cheaper. I don't know much about the healthcare, I do know drugs are cheaper. Did you once live in Chattanooga and not like it? It is one of the best cities in the world to live...

March 17, 2014 at 5:35 p.m.

In other words, Nucanuck, you're an elitest, leftist, loon in the mold of Al Gore.

March 17, 2014 at 5:38 p.m.

Nothing more sorry than a wealthy, elitist, leftist ex-patriot pontificating about "climate change" and "raping mother earth", bragging about his tiny "carbon footprint", and condemning regular working folks for driving to work.

March 17, 2014 at 5:55 p.m.

As I mentioned, why not make the ultimate sacrifice to "mother earth" and reduce your "carbon footprint" completely by ceasing all inhaling and exhaling.

March 17, 2014 at 5:57 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

There are two different perspectives on future oil (and energy) use: the cornucopian and the peak oilers.

The cornucopians assume that one way or another, technology will find a way to keep an ever increasing supply of energy flowing. The peak oilers believe that, for a variety of reasons, much of the remaining fossil fuel resources will never be extracted.

How are those mutually exclusive? Isn’t there a majority overlap between these two. Of course there are some “Blue Sky” optimists among the “cornucopians” and there are “Luddites” among the “peak oilers”.

The graphs showing the soaring amounts of investment to extract a falling amount of energy are like a cold shower to those who examine the charts. There is a reason that major oil companies are cutting back on capital investment dollars.

They are? ... I thought they just spent tens of billions on upgrading their refineries.

Almost no major oil companies buy into fracking as a solution. Why? The numbers are horrible and somebody is going to be left holding the bag on those investments as the wells-drilled numbers can't keep up with the soaring depletion numbers.

Why Six Big Oil and Fracking Companies Just Became Great Stocks to Buy

Why Six Big Oil and Fracking Companies Just Became Great Stocks to Buy -Apache Corp (NYSE:APA) - 24/7 Wall St. http://247wallst.com/energy-business/2013/08/20/why-six-big-oil-and-fracking-companies-just-became-great-stocks-to-buy/#ixzz2wG5gXTyR


http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future/takeover.html

Not too long ago, more than 80 percent of U.S. gas supplies were produced by “mom-and-pop businesses”—companies with an average of a dozen employees and a market capitalization of less than $500 million.

But when ExxonMobil announced its successful acquisition of XTO Energy in November 2010, the face of the gas industry changed enormously.

With each passing day, the list of the top gas producers is starting to look a whole lot like the list of Big Oil companies. Today, the natural gas industry is dominated by companies whose names are well known – ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, ConocoPhillips and Chevron are all in the top 10.

ExxonMobil is now the largest natural gas producing company in the U.S., producing about 16% of the nation’s total consumption.


In spite of the accumulating evidence, cornucopians believe that there will always be enough or there will be substitutes. We will find out soon enough who is wrong.

And the Luddites think it’s all over but the shouting and moving into caves.

March 17, 2014 at 6:01 p.m.
rick1 said...

How are the pot smoking environmentalists going to react to the fact that Marijuana grows in California produce more carbon than 3 million cars

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/17/earth-going-to-pot-marijuana-grows-in-california-produce-more-carbon-than-3-million-cars/

March 17, 2014 at 6:15 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

Jt, if my prior post about how my family lives gave you the impression that we are living a bare bones existence, I apologize. We live quite well and even though we have made lifestyle changes, we have a quality of life that few can rival.

What the he## are you rambling on about? When have I ever mentioned your family’s lifestyle or standard of living?

We are surrounded by beauty at every turn. We live in a wonderful climate with a little too much dampness for three months followed by near perfection. The deer in the garden are maddening, but we will have a deer fence up by the end of the week. There are very few biting bugs (LMFAO!!) here…don't need screens. Well educated people (Don’t you feel out of place) from every corner of the earth help with a broader understanding of universal issues. No creationists, no climate change deniers.. yep, we've got it pretty good.

Sounds just like someone that would bragging about their wealth, education, intellect, virility, etc. ... just more internet braggadocio.

March 17, 2014 at 6:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

I don't care at all about gas prices.

WTF ... I thought you were humping the theme that higher gas prices lowered everyone's standard of living including yours ... and now we find out you don’t care about that at all?

March 17, 2014 at 6:20 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

wallyworld said...

Another shining example of our uneducated citizens. This country is doomed unless we up our quality of education and information. We should move toward more science and learning the English language instead of teaching science fiction and voodoo mythology. our democrat(sic)friends don't want to here(sic) anything** -- is that supposed to be English?

I agree as we need many more pseudo intellectual unemployable English majors to correct everyone's internet posts. It’s a sure path to economic success ... Right?

March 17, 2014 at 6:22 p.m.
conservative said...

Jt6gR3hM, I think you would get more Liberal readers if you broke your comments up.

Liberals have a short attention span.

The Luddites shout and whine but the hypocrites don't move into caves although they will live in a tent temporarily, trash the environment, behave like the monkeys they believe they are descended from if they can get a national audience.

March 17, 2014 at 6:24 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Start an initiative similar to the US-Soviet space race in the 50's and 60's or the race to get the A-bomb. There are cars that run without petroleum, but as of now, it's just a niche market.

There no rational analogy there ... military and exploratory space rockets and A-bombs will always be niche markets. Electric vehicle transportation, for the general public, is not; in that it will be widely accepted when it becomes economically and performance viable.

Every American (that is not vested in petroleum) should be supporting this. Until then we are slaves to the oil companies and their lobbyists.

Purchasing an industry’s product due to their better valve in relation to the alternatives is in no way a reasonable definition of being enslaved. The public has shown itself very willing to dump one technology and embrace another, almost instantaneously, when they think their needs and wishes are better served.

BTW ... currently electric cars are more harmful to the environment and any currently available alternate energy source that is politically correct will not power them in mass quantities.

March 17, 2014 at 6:58 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Maxipad, I'm 36 years old. I guarantee I am younger than you.

And you’re better educated and richer as well ... Right?

Never took a dime from the government I didn't earn (my pay while I was in the military and the GI Bill).

Is that in currency/coinage or value added? ... You do know what you Fleabaggers have to say about people “not building it themselves” ... don’t you?

And even if I was "a 70 year old on guvment relief" at least I am not a delusional liar such as yourself.

So you say

Life must be exhausting for you being envious of the wealthy all of the time. Keep working that 10.00 an hour job, bro. Eventually, you'll be one of those millionaires you claim to currently be (insert sarcasm now).

And you probably need to get back to work now. I'm sure the manager at the Kangaroo station where you work wouldn't be happy with you surfing the web when you should be ringing up customers items and turning on the gas pumps.

Why are you so hateful and disdainful towards those at the lower end of the income and wealth brackets that you resort to using their plight to attempt the shaming of your political opponents?

March 17, 2014 at 7:04 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Jt, 36 sure would be an arbitrary age for someone to choose. If I was going to lie, I would have said I was 25 or 30. And Maxipad is a liar, and everyone on here knows it, yet you and a couple of others see the necessity on taking up for him. I busted him a couple of weeks ago in a lie and I'm sure you saw it with your own eyes.

I will respond to all of your other claims when you admit you were wrong earlier yesterday. Until then, I will just avoid your posts like you avoided mine after I showed you were wrong.

March 17, 2014 at 7:18 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

I don't recall anyone taking up for Maxi, Gassy. Refresh me.

March 17, 2014 at 7:24 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Jt, 36 sure would be an arbitrary age for someone to choose. If I was going to lie, I would have said I was 25 or 30.

Don’t you feel you’re trying a little too hard?

And Maxipad is a liar, and everyone on here knows it, yet you and a couple of others see the necessity on taking up for him. I busted him a couple of weeks ago in a lie and I'm sure you saw it with your own eyes.

But it is so funny that I know what he’s doing and so should you “bright boys” but he continues to cast it out there and reeling you carp in.

I will respond to all of your other claims when you admit you were wrong earlier yesterday. Until then, I will just avoid your posts like you avoided mine after I showed you were wrong.

I couldn’t care less whether you respond or not. If you don’t it just allows me to take shots at you without you defending yourself.

As far as catching me in a lie you have yet to admit that you misspoke in saying we export more oil than we import. If you had said refined oil products then you would have had a defensible position. However that would have still been a meaningless detail as we have very little need to import refined oil products since we make more than we can possibly use anyway. As a result exporting even small amounts would equal more than the tiny amounts we do import.

March 17, 2014 at 8:01 p.m.
jesse said...

J T 's right about max gassious and con is suckin ya in too!

sometimes i think alpo is doin the same thing!

March 17, 2014 at 8:23 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Jesse, come on man, you call out Max as much as I do. But to stay in the good standing of the TFP Message Board elitists, I'll ignore Maxipad the same way I ignore Conman.

"Don’t you feel you’re trying a little too hard?"

Not at all.

March 17, 2014 at 8:39 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

"Don’t you feel you’re trying a little too hard?"

Not at all.

Gassy ... Was that a response to me? ... It better not be, that's all I got to say.

March 17, 2014 at 10:47 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nucanuck said...

Why am I pushing the conservative/conservation cause, that is supposed to come from you rightees?

Maybe because you are a watermelon ... Red on the inside and green on the outside.

March 17, 2014 at 11:09 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

Well guess what you simple-minded fool? People are finding ways to adapt to an oil-free existence. You can jump on board or be left out in the cold.

Well you idiot .... Even the most remote natives in the wild are wearing “polyester T-shirts” that say “2014 Superbowl Champs - Denver Broncos” that were dumped after the game.

March 17, 2014 at 11:10 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.