Would the real villan stand up please?

ViRedd

New Member
Dumb or Ill-Informed

Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, June 04, 2008

What assumptions do congressmen make about the American people? Do they assume that we're dumb or ill-informed about the energy problems we are experiencing? Every time there has been a huge spike in gasoline prices, Congress hauls oil company executives before their committees to accuse them of greed, obscene profits and price-fixing. One federal investigation after another of supposed oil company misconduct turns up nothing to substantiate congressional allegations. Unfortunately, the congressional hearings make front page news and lead the evening television news, but the results of federal investigations that follow are only casually mentioned deep in the body of newspapers and get little or no time on the evening television news. If news media people had an ounce of integrity, they would highlight the federal investigation findings that undermine congressional charges of oil company misconduct and they would question the congressmen who made those charges.

Americans might prefer heroes-and-villains explanations to problems to reality-based explanations. A politically satisfying explanation for today's $4 a gallon price, when it was less than $2 a gallon a couple of years ago, is because oil company executives have all of a sudden become greedy in their pursuit of "obscene" profits. As such, congressmen, as our heroes, should call these greedy men on the carpet and take sanctions against them in the forms of windfall profits tax, price controls and other measures to take away their ill-gotten gains -- never mind the effects of the 1980 windfall profits tax. According to the Congressional Research Service, the 1980 windfall profits tax had the effect of decreasing domestic production by 3 percent to 6 percent, thereby increasing American dependence on foreign oil sources by 8 percent to 16 percent.

Controlling the price of anything is very difficult and it can only be accomplished through the force of government, mostly by restricting supply. The U.S. Congress is a major player in oil supply restriction, and OPEC nations must be laughing all the way to the bank. Congress has banned energy exploration in 85 percent of our coastal waters. Ironically, China, in conjunction with Cuba, is drilling for oil nearer to our coastline than U.S. oil companies are permitted. According to "We don't have to take $4 gas prices -- we can drill," written by Sterling Burnett in the Houston Chronicle (5/21/08, "It is estimated that beneath America's coast lies enough oil to fuel 60 million cars in the United States for 60 years and enough natural gas to heat 60 million homes for 160 years. … If allowed access to American oil reserves in Alaska and off our coastline, American oil companies could increase our country's reserves an estimated fivefold, taking the United States from 11th place to fourth among the countries with proven oil reserves."

You say, "What about the environmental impact?" Contrary to the hysterical claims made by environmental extremists, caribou and other wildlife have expanded and flourished in and around Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, unaffected by the oil and gas development. What's more, Burnett points out that the "two leading environmental groups, the Audubon Society and the Nature Conservancy, have allowed oil and gas production on several of their most important and unique nature preserves."

Environmentalists come to their senses when non-drilling philosophy costs them something. It's two-faced hypocrisy. At times I've suggested that the best way to get oil exploration in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve is to give the land to environmentalists. You can bet they wouldn't sit on billions of dollars of oil and gas.

The true villain in our having to cough up $60, $70 or $80 to fill our gas tanks is the U.S. Congress caught in the grip of environmental extremists. But if reality is too difficult to swallow, we can continue to blame and support the congressional attack on oil executives, turn food into oil and think of other crackpot "solutions."

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
 

pokey

Well-Known Member
Hmm, I like it. I've always been pro-drilling for U. S. sites. Although I still think we should put some government effort into alternative fuels (namely cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, food for fuel is stupid). Imagine what a government effort akin to the Manhattan project could create in just a few years.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
All the ethanol and bio deisel plant owners would have to do is go down to Brazil.... They have been making cellulose based ethanol and bio diesel for years.
 

chroniccitizen

Active Member
tell you the truth, i think none of this matters. i mean in five years all the vehicles are gonna be hydrogen i mean honda made one bmw is importing one and toyota is right behind them for now i have a 4 cylinder scion that has great milage
 

medicineman

New Member
Lets look at the congressional hearings a little closer. Arent most congressmen financed by big oil in some manner or another. Don't you suppose they are in collusion with them. As in: Hey lets get together and put on a big charade for the American people, then they'll at least think we care and we're doing something about it, meanwhile just keep up the good work, higher prices will eventually get all the poor people off the roads and mean less traffic for the rest of us. This makes perfect sense since most of what congress does is a charade in one form or another.
 

earlymorninstonepeomp

Well-Known Member
we are at or nearing the 1/2 way point of the know oil reserves worldwide. theres only so much of this stuff and when its gone its gone. the oil companies know this....so does every other body profiting off of crude and its by-products. only so much and they're damn sure gonna get as much as they can while they can....hence $4 gas prices. they are NEVER gonna go back to where they were and we will pay what ever price THEY deem appropiate until THEY have made their $$$$. Alternative fuel sources etc.etc all sound great and are within our grasp.....as soon as THEY are sure they've sucked every penny they can from us first. We've put men on the moon, we're digging for h20 on Mars for god sake.....but you won't see an alternative fuel source until the profits from our current one are maximized.
 

kronicsmurf

Well-Known Member
Congress calling in the oil executives is just pure posturing on their part. they could care less if the middle class or the poor are paying most of their pay for fuel. when has congress ever gave a damn about any thing other that than the fat raise they give themselves every year? and yeah i'm sure most of them have their fingers in the oil barrel.
 

We TaRdED

Well-Known Member
IM with medicine man.
I wouldn't doubt what MM says either.

I know GWB used to be an oil man in Texas, he knows how to make money from oil-thats his business. If someone was in the hydrogen business and than became POTUS I'm sure it would be instinctual to try and sell more of their product(hydrogen)... Idk, thats just how I'm thinking about it.:mrgreen:


RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
 

ViRedd

New Member
The Democrats in Congress are NOT beholden to the oil companies. They are in bed with the Environmental Lobby. While they demean the oil executives for the current prices of gasoline, it is THEY who are to blame for the thirty years of stone walling on the drilling issue, the refinery building issue, the no nuke issue, the no coal for oil issue. The very people you elect to office are the enemy of the people.

Get a freakin' clue, people. <Sheesh!>

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
The Democrats in Congress are NOT beholden to the oil companies. They are in bed with the Environmental Lobby. While they demean the oil executives for the current prices of gasoline, it is THEY who are to blame for the thirty years of stone walling on the drilling issue, the refinery building issue, the no nuke issue, the no coal for oil issue. The very people you elect to office are the enemy of the people.

Get a freakin' clue, people. <Sheesh!>

Vi
Explain the 500% increase in the price of gas in 7 years.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
We tard Bush was a dismal failure as an oil man.... The Family actually made their money in Pharmaceuticals companies. They have been heavily invested in Abbot Labs, Merc ect since the 1920's.
 

We TaRdED

Well-Known Member
We tard Bush was a dismal failure as an oil man.... The Family actually made their money in Pharmaceuticals companies. They have been heavily invested in Abbot Labs, Merc ect since the 1920's.
Thanks Dank...I figured they made out from oil in one some way. Hmmmm..... That might explain why OxyCottin is the medication of choice for serious pain:confused: Idk...

Its just strikes me as odd that the gov't will allow prescription drugs that are highly addictive(OC's are synthetic heroine). But why not marijuana which is a plant that came from this earth that has healing properties and is not addictive?

I'm a little biased when it comes to the addictive pain medication. I have seen my brother go from being well off(making 70k a year with a house at the age of 23) to a poor drug addict that lost his house over the course of less than a year. To make a long story short, its been heart breaking for me.

Synthetic heroine(Oxy Cottin) is very addictive and legal(by prescription).

Marijuana is not addictive but it is illegal.

Go figure:confused: (I don't live in a state like California where everyone and their grandmother has a medical marijuana card:mrgreen:)

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Now your starting to figure it out...
If Medical Marijuana were legalized nation wide, Pharmaceuticals companies would take a big Hit in the pocket book.
Same if it were legalized period for both Medical and Recreational use, Alcohol Companies would be financially hit as well...
It's Lobbyist from those two sectors who keep holding the Legalization issue at bay.... Did you know that Tobacco Companies are buying up Hugh Tracts of Land in South America? Think about that one.
 

We TaRdED

Well-Known Member
Did you know that Tobacco Companies are buying up Hugh Tracts of Land in South America? Think about that one.
Thats the first time I have heard about that.... Whats your implications? Do you think they would grow pot and illegally smuggle it into the states. Or do you think they might be getting ready in advance just in case pot becomes legal? Or do you think they will do the former first until they can do the latter?:D

Or do you think they will grow more tobacco:lol: HAHA

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
 
Top