CSNbbs

Full Version: Can Obama overcome his inept energy policy?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Even though Barry currently leads the weak ass Republican field, can he still win with his inept energy policy that has limited US exploration for new crude oil?

Contrary to what some want to believe $5/gallon gasoline is going to be a FACT come November 2012.

Look at recent developments:

1) Saudi Arabia cuts oil production and reduces exports
2) Iran halts exports to UK and France
3) Crude oil hits 9 month high

These developments mean higher gasoline prices, higher inflation, higher unemployement.

Other than leftwing nutjobs will anyone else look past $5/gallon gasoline and vote for Barry in November?
Wouldn't a sign of his energy policy be energy production that we actually control? Aren't your points more to do with his Foreign Policy?
He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
(02-20-2012 11:30 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?
(02-20-2012 11:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:30 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?

Pro pollution? Please state evidence of this. Again...you skin your ignorance by speaking for others.
(02-20-2012 11:46 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:30 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?

Pro pollution? Please state evidence of this. Again...you skin your ignorance by speaking for others.
Just read your and the other righties posts on this board.
(02-20-2012 12:31 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:46 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:30 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?

Pro pollution? Please state evidence of this. Again...you skin your ignorance by speaking for others.
Just read your and the other righties posts on this board.

Here is where I call you a fabricator. Show me ONE post where I have advocated a pro pollution stance. I am waiting.
(02-20-2012 12:33 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 12:31 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:46 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:30 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]He can overcome it...but..He has no balls to do it. He is bought and paid for by the ultra left environmental wackos.
As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?

Pro pollution? Please state evidence of this. Again...you skin your ignorance by speaking for others.
Just read your and the other righties posts on this board.

Here is where I call you a fabricator. Show me ONE post where I have advocated a pro pollution stance. I am waiting.
You say get rid of the EPA and let the "free market" decide how much pollution is released. Unless you are brain dead(which, I personally think you are) that won't work to keep pollution down. Never has. Never will. THus you are pro-pollution.
(02-20-2012 12:35 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 12:33 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 12:31 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:46 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:39 AM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]As opposed to the righties being bought by the pro-pollution wackos like you?

Pro pollution? Please state evidence of this. Again...you skin your ignorance by speaking for others.
Just read your and the other righties posts on this board.

Here is where I call you a fabricator. Show me ONE post where I have advocated a pro pollution stance. I am waiting.
You say get rid of the EPA and let the "free market" decide how much pollution is released. Unless you are brain dead(which, I personally think you are) that won't work to keep pollution down. Never has. Never will. THus you are pro-pollution.

Wrong. I advocate even more stringent standards on pollution than the government. Just because I don't want the government involved has nothing to do with being against regulation. Again.. you skin your ignorance and are a bald faced lair in regard to my stance. Of course I don't expect you take the time to educate yourself on anything that does not include worship of the state and it's control. You are a slave to it and have been so indoctrinated by it that any thought of having to let it go would shatter your shallow ideals.
Who is going to hold them to these more stringent standards that you support? Who is going to do this regulation? Clearly consumers aren't.. so what's your alternative solution?
(02-20-2012 10:30 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: [ -> ]Even though Barry currently leads the weak ass Republican field, can he still win with his inept energy policy that has limited US exploration for new crude oil?

Contrary to what some want to believe $5/gallon gasoline is going to be a FACT come November 2012.

Look at recent developments:

1) Saudi Arabia cuts oil production and reduces exports
2) Iran halts exports to UK and France
3) Crude oil hits 9 month high

These developments mean higher gasoline prices, higher inflation, higher unemployement.

Other than leftwing nutjobs will anyone else look past $5/gallon gasoline and vote for Barry in November?

I'd venture to say there are a lot of voters that would look past the price of gas because the price of gas does not affect them. They either use public transportation or live off the government and therefore don't drive. The number of these voters is larger than people think.
(02-20-2012 01:03 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: [ -> ]Who is going to hold them to these more stringent standards that you support? Who is going to do this regulation? Clearly consumers aren't.. so what's your alternative solution?
He believes the consumer will. That is why his beliefs fail.
If they really are finally putting new nuclear facilities into production under this administration after so long (even as an Obama supporter, I'll believe it when I see it), I would think the argument is blunted some.

It also doesn't help when Goldman Sachs comes out and blames it largely on rampant speculation & trading, when the GOP has supported less regulation that could slow that down. It wouldn't be hard for Obama to spin this, at least to the point its not going to help the GOP much. Not saying Obama / GS would be right, but I think this issue is a lot less easy to pin on Obama than some might hope. This could blow up in the rights face if they play it poorly, and I just don't know if there's enough to be gained if they play it well to make it worth it.

And I know Robert.. which is of course laughable, just wanted to see if he would actually try to defend his preposterous comments.
(02-20-2012 11:29 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]Wouldn't a sign of his energy policy be energy production that we actually control? Aren't your points more to do with his Foreign Policy?

Energy policy

No NEW offshore oil exploration since BP accident
No to the Keystone Pipeline
No New Coal fired electric plants
Closure of 32 coal fired plants

A proactive energy policy would counter the Foreign Policy problems.

US Energy policy should be

Drill Here Drill NOW
Yes to Keystone Pipeline
Clean Coal electric plants
No closure of existing electric plants until replacement capacity is on line.
(02-20-2012 03:45 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:29 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]Wouldn't a sign of his energy policy be energy production that we actually control? Aren't your points more to do with his Foreign Policy?

Energy policy

No NEW offshore oil exploration since BP accident
No to the Keystone Pipeline
No New Coal fired electric plants
Closure of 32 coal fired plants

A proactive energy policy would counter the Foreign Policy problems.

US Energy policy should be

Drill Here Drill NOW
Yes to Keystone Pipeline
Clean Coal electric plants
No closure of existing electric plants until replacement capacity is on line.
Don't forget opening dozens of new nuke plants. That is key.
5 years ago the left was blaming Bush and his oil company cronies. So shouldn't Obama and his cronies get the same treatment? I say no - he should get worse treatment because Bush wanted the oil to flow, obama doesn't and high prices are exactly what he wanted.
(02-20-2012 01:03 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: [ -> ]Who is going to hold them to these more stringent standards that you support? Who is going to do this regulation? Clearly consumers aren't.. so what's your alternative solution?

Two places:

1) Government, actually. You can have stricter substantive standards at the same time you have less complicated procedures. Norway has far stricter standards on offshore drilling, but you can get a well approved in about 1/10 the time becuase the procedures are streamlined. Companies would rather drill in the Norwegian North Sea and pay extra to comply with the stricter standards because being able to get results with more speed and certainty is a bigger consideration. More complicated procedures exist not to protect the environment or endangered species or the planet, but rather to protect the jobs of environmental lawyers, consultants, and bureaucrats.

2) The private sector, if we create property rights which make it easier to sue polluters. There is no doubt that such a system would impose tougher standards than what we have now.
(02-20-2012 06:56 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 01:03 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: [ -> ]Who is going to hold them to these more stringent standards that you support? Who is going to do this regulation? Clearly consumers aren't.. so what's your alternative solution?

Two places:

1) Government, actually. You can have stricter substantive standards at the same time you have less complicated procedures. Norway has far stricter standards on offshore drilling, but you can get a well approved in about 1/10 the time becuase the procedures are streamlined. Companies would rather drill in the Norwegian North Sea and pay extra to comply with the stricter standards because being able to get results with more speed and certainty is a bigger consideration. More complicated procedures exist not to protect the environment or endangered species or the planet, but rather to protect the jobs of environmental lawyers, consultants, and bureaucrats.

2) The private sector, if we create property rights which make it easier to sue polluters. There is no doubt that such a system would impose tougher standards than what we have now.

Thanks Owl.....Although I favor total market solutions to this...I understand that is impossible under our current paradigm at this point.

Here is my solution. Industry already has come together to set standards. Without this cooperation you could not buy a bolt that would fit a nut.03-idea Chaos does not exist in industry because those in search of profit know that it is not in their best interest to have multiple competing standards. The same can be applied across the board....including environmental issues. This paradigm..in conjunction with strong tort laws that protect private property against pollution would be MORE stringent and MORE adhered to than the governmental mandates we currently have. WHY?...because property owners would be very proactive in protecting their property and businesses would be very sensitive to not violating that property for fear of being litigated against and having consumers remove patronage due to their practices.
(02-20-2012 01:09 PM)RobertN Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 01:03 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: [ -> ]Who is going to hold them to these more stringent standards that you support? Who is going to do this regulation? Clearly consumers aren't.. so what's your alternative solution?
He believes the consumer will. That is why his beliefs fail.

Both of you fail to consider that industry already has standards agreed upon for their mutual benefits.There are tomes that map out standards of thousands of products agreed to by competing industries. Why is it so hard to consider that can't be applied to this problem if we have solid and upheld private property rights? The only part that the government needs involvement in is strong judicial oversight. For clarity...I am TOTALLY in favor a strong justice or arbitration system. It is essential.
(02-20-2012 05:02 PM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 03:45 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-20-2012 11:29 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]Wouldn't a sign of his energy policy be energy production that we actually control? Aren't your points more to do with his Foreign Policy?

Energy policy

No NEW offshore oil exploration since BP accident
No to the Keystone Pipeline
No New Coal fired electric plants
Closure of 32 coal fired plants

A proactive energy policy would counter the Foreign Policy problems.

US Energy policy should be

Drill Here Drill NOW
Yes to Keystone Pipeline
Clean Coal electric plants
No closure of existing electric plants until replacement capacity is on line.
Don't forget opening dozens of new nuke plants. That is key.

How many nuclear power plants have came online in the past 5 years?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Reference URL's