# Why is only one news group picking this up?



## Angel Heart

CQ Politics | House Adjourns, But Republicans Linger to Bash Democrats on Energy


> House Adjourns, But Republicans Linger to Bash Democrats on Energy
> By Edward Epstein, CQ Staff
> The cameras and the microphones were off, but that didnt stop a small group of Republicans from taking over the floor after the House adjourned to attack Democrats for leaving town without doing something to lower gas prices.
> 
> Madame Speaker, Where art thou? Ted Poe , R-Texas, shouted from the well of the House. This room is vacant of most members of Congress. Where, oh where, has Congress gone? he yelled to about a dozen other Republicans, tourists in the gallery, some House pages, and Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, the lone Democrat who witnessed the unusual proceeding.
> 
> Republicans want President Bush or Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., to call the House back into session during the five-week recess to vote on the GOPs energy plan, which seeks an end to a long-standing moratorium on drilling along the outer continental shelf and also seeks to boost conservation and research on alternative energy sources.
> 
> Bring the Congress back. Lets have a real up or down vote, Minority Leader John A. Boehner said after coming into the chamber from a press conference. The American people expect Congress to represent the will of the American people, the Ohio Republican added, to the cheers of the group.
> 
> Pelosi and other Democratic leaders oppose GOP efforts to end the offshore ban or permit drilling in Alaskas Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. They say tens of million of acres of federal land and ocean floor are already available for drilling and have proposed use it or lose it legislation to force oil and gas companies to use their leases or give them up. They have also proposed a series of other steps, including forcing President Bush to release tens of millions of barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a step the Democrats say would lower world oil prices quickly by increasing supply.
> 
> More...


----------



## Annie

Angel Heart said:


> CQ Politics | House Adjourns, But Republicans Linger to Bash Democrats on Energy



The Republicans seem to be getting their mojo back. They hear and understand that the people need relief.


----------



## Chris

Kathianne said:


> The Republicans seem to be getting their mojo back. They hear and understand that the people need relief.



Relief from eight years of George Bush.


----------



## Chris

Republicans, the best political party money can buy....

Oil & Gas: Long-Term Contribution Trends | OpenSecrets


----------



## Annie

Kirk said:


> Relief from eight years of George Bush.



you hope. However at this point in the election cycle, Kerry and Gore were substantially ahead of GW who WON each election. Obama is today virtually tied with the underfunded, ignored by MSM GOP candidate, McCain.


----------



## editec

This would be the same Republicans who voted down heating assistance?

Yes, their concern for Americans is quite touching.

Let their crocodile tears flow for the benefit of the cameras.


----------



## Charles_Main

editec said:


> This would be the same Republicans who voted down heating assistance?
> 
> Yes, their concern for Americans is quite touching.
> 
> Let their crocodile tears flow for the benefit of the cameras.



Opposing more spending that we can not pay for is a good thing IMO, while Opposing even VOTING on drilling, is not. 

Nancy is being an obstructionist all the way. 

LET THEM VOTE.

Oh wait, it's to late now. Nancy bought a 6 week delay by blocking a vote and taking off on vacation.

What saints your Dems are indeed.


----------



## BrianH

Charles_Main said:


> Opposing more spending that we can not pay for is a good thing IMO, while Opposing even VOTING on drilling, is not.
> 
> Nancy is being an obstructionist all the way.
> 
> LET THEM VOTE.
> 
> Oh wait, it's to late now. Nancy bought a 6 week delay by blocking a vote and taking off on vacation.
> 
> What saints your Dems are indeed.




All the while the Dems perfer to get their gas tax free from city and county pumps....What jerks.


----------



## Prefx

Good for the Democrats. The best thing a congressman can do is go on a very, very long vacation. After they cut their own salary, of course.


----------



## Chris

BrianH said:


> All the while the Dems perfer to get their gas tax free from city and county pumps....What jerks.



Why gas is so expensive.....

Oil & Gas: Long-Term Contribution Trends | OpenSecrets


----------



## greenpartyaz

This is just a political stunt, this is nothing surprising.


----------



## BrianH

Kirk said:


> Why gas is so expensive.....
> 
> Oil & Gas: Long-Term Contribution Trends | OpenSecrets



Basic fact, additions to the supply will lower the cost.  Whether people conserve gas by not driving, or more oil is drilled, the supply is still being added to, thus lowering cost.  Do you expect everyone to just switch (right now) to an electric car?  Millions and millions of machines and vehicles run off of oil right now.  Until other technologies can and are made readily available for consumers, then the oil supply needs to be added to for relief at the pump.


----------



## Paulie

Kathianne said:


> you hope. However at this point in the election cycle, Kerry and Gore were substantially ahead of GW who WON each election. Obama is today virtually tied with the underfunded, ignored by MSM GOP candidate, McCain.



Ignored by MSM?  Come on now Kath, you don't really believe that, do you?


----------



## Chris

BrianH said:


> Basic fact, additions to the supply will lower the cost.  Whether people conserve gas by not driving, or more oil is drilled, the supply is still being added to, thus lowering cost.  Do you expect everyone to just switch (right now) to an electric car?  Millions and millions of machines and vehicles run off of oil right now.  Until other technologies can and are made readily available for consumers, then the oil supply needs to be added to for relief at the pump.



The technologies will be made available when the two oil men in the White House are gone, and a Democrat is in office.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

Kirk said:


> The technologies will be made available when the two oil men in the White House are gone, and a Democrat is in office.



I bet you believe in the tooth fairy too? Don't ya?


----------



## Chris

RetiredGySgt said:


> I bet you believe in the tooth fairy too? Don't ya?



I believe money talks....

Oil & Gas: Long-Term Contribution Trends | OpenSecrets


----------



## sealybobo

Kathianne said:


> The Republicans seem to be getting their mojo back. They hear and understand that the people need relief.



are you retarded?  we're not giving the oil companies anwar and offshore.  

if you knew the facts, and you clearly don't, you would take 30 billion from the oil companies.  that's the solution.  before oilman bush got into office, the oil companies made 8 billion in profit.  have I lost you yet?  i'll slow down.  this yr, 40 billion.

ok, the dollar is weak.  fine, so let them keep 10 billion.  but not 40.

the oil companies sell our oil on the world market, not to us for cheap.  stupid.  giving them offshore won't save dick.

they lie about investing the money in alternative energy, so take back the tax breaks, and regulate them.  but bush apointees won't because he appointed oil men to regulate themselves.  I bet you don't know any of this.

and don't you dare say they should be able to charge whatever they want, because I bet you don't know the 00-06 gop congress passed a law that the oil companies can NEVER be charged more than $56ish dollars a barrel for oil.  Why when they gouge us?

There is no shortage of oil.  They purposely lag on refining capacity.

Here is the last fact that i'm sure will go in one ear and out the other.  They were making 8 cents on every dollar.  now they make 9.  That's not supply and demand.


----------



## Jeepers

Let the oil men keep their profits, (and I'm not just saying this because my wife's family is heavily vested in oil). Exxon is not to blame. They are just benefitting from the current system. Energy trading needs to be reregulated. This would keep down speculation runs on a precious and neccessary commodity. Check this out Pensito Review  Closing Enron Loophole Would Drop Oil Prices 25% - 50% Overnight... 





> On the other hand, Congress and George Bush could take a step tomorrow that would create a drop in oil prices of between 25 and 50 percent overnight, simply by closing the Enron Loophole...Enron got a law passed containing what is now known as the Enron loophole. Where Gramm deregulated individual trades, the Enron loophole deregulated entire markets, online markets. Enron had just started its own online market, and set its sites on the state of California.
> 
> Over the next six months, California suffered 38 rolling blackouts, as Enron used artificial shortages, bogus deals and total knowledge of the market as sole owner of its own online market to triple California&#8216;s energy bills. In the dark, regulators had less power than California did, leaving Enron laughing about it.
> 
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The money you stole from those poor grandmothers in California.
> 
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, Grandma Millie, man.
> 
> UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, now she wants her (EXPLETIVE DELETED) money back for all the power you charged&#8212;jammed up her (EXPLETIVE DELETED) at 250 dollars a megawatt hour.



Isnt this the bill that the republicans held up last week? Why do republicans want high oil prices? Is it to convince the american public that we need to cut loose with some new oil contracts... Naaa .. Cant be that. Americans are too smart to be taken that way...

It does however bring a tear to my eye reading about all this concern you republicans have for the average American Joe out ther spending 4$ a gallon for gas...

When you get a chance to wipe off those crocadile tears, please go and give yourselves a hand. Without you cats, where would this country be?

Oh, btw.. the lame duck minority party will not be dictating the future of our energy policy.. Kudos Nancy for shutting down a bunch of disgruntled windbags who when were in power did absolutly nothing to procure any semblence of energy independance even after 9/11.


----------



## editec

Charles_Main said:


> Opposing more spending that we can not pay for is a good thing IMO, while Opposing even VOTING on drilling, is not.
> 
> Nancy is being an obstructionist all the way.
> 
> LET THEM VOTE.
> 
> Oh wait, it's to late now. Nancy bought a 6 week delay by blocking a vote and taking off on vacation.
> 
> What saints your Dems are indeed.


 
You re under the impression they are my Democrats? 

Or that I think them saints?

How simple the world must be for you.

Black hats and white hats, eh?

If only..


----------



## sealybobo

BrianH said:


> Basic fact, additions to the supply will lower the cost.  Whether people conserve gas by not driving, or more oil is drilled, the supply is still being added to, thus lowering cost.  Do you expect everyone to just switch (right now) to an electric car?  Millions and millions of machines and vehicles run off of oil right now.  Until other technologies can and are made readily available for consumers, then the oil supply needs to be added to for relief at the pump.



Yes, a few cents a gallon, until Israel does a fly by on Iran and then speculators will raise them back up.

And as soon as John McCain wins, gas will go back up, for 3.5 yrs, then they'll lower them again a little before the 2012 election to dupe you again.


----------



## sealybobo

Jeepers said:


> Let the oil men keep their profits, (and I'm not just saying this because my wife's family is heavily vested in oil). Exxon is not to blame. They are just benefitting from the current system. Energy trading needs to be reregulated. This would keep down speculation runs on a precious and neccessary commodity. Check this out Pensito Review  Closing Enron Loophole Would Drop Oil Prices 25% - 50% Overnight...
> 
> Isnt this the bill that the republicans held up last week? Why do republicans want high oil prices? Is it to convince the american public that we need to cut loose with some new oil contracts... Naaa .. Cant be that. Americans are too smart to be taken that way...
> 
> It does however bring a tear to my eye reading about all this concern you republicans have for the average American Joe out ther spending 4$ a gallon for gas...
> 
> When you get a chance to wipe off those crocadile tears, please go and give yourselves a hand. Without you cats, where would this country be?
> 
> Oh, btw.. the lame duck minority party will not be dictating the future of our energy policy.. Kudos Nancy for shutting down a bunch of disgruntled windbags who when were in power did absolutly nothing to procure any semblence of energy independance even after 9/11.



nice post.  I never hear repubs discuss the enron loophole and how much that's costing us.  they just want to give big oil more land so they can sell it on the world market.  

its like selling us locks for our doors to prevent burglars from getting in but we have no locks for our windows.  bad analogy, but I think you'll get the point?


----------



## sealybobo

Jeepers said:


> Let the oil men keep their profits, (and I'm not just saying this because my wife's family is heavily vested in oil).



My friend says the same thing.  His in laws are loaded so he's a conservative.  Plus he's a cop so his job isn't  leaving the country.  Nor are illegals taking his job.  Plus he'll get a pension.  Even though he sees what I see, he tries to argue, but I got him to admit that he's banking on this enheritance.  Plus, he's racist.

Many of us don't think he'll make it.  He's always hanging out at bars with his buddies and leaves his wife at home.  I don't wish him ill, but I will laugh at him if they ever divorce.  

Democrats might be tax and spenders, but repubs are borrow and spend even more.  You know which is worse.  Both need to change for the better, but one is worse.  Much worse.  Eventually gop politics is going to hurt all of us and only the rich will get thru it.

I say end the federal reserve and start all over again.  The dollar is only worth the paper it is printed on.  Socialize energy and kick speecial interest out of washington.  Corporations can't vote so why are they involved in politics?  And protect industries that are vital to America, like auto manufacturing.


----------



## BrianH

sealybobo said:


> Yes, a few cents a gallon, until Israel does a fly by on Iran and then speculators will raise them back up.
> 
> And as soon as John McCain wins, gas will go back up, for 3.5 yrs, then they'll lower them again a little before the 2012 election to dupe you again.



A few cents is better than no relief yes?  And tell me exactly how you plan on magically converting everyone's automobiles to run on faith and hope?


----------



## Paulie

sealybobo said:


> My friend says the same thing.  His in laws are loaded so he's a conservative.  Plus he's a cop so his job isn't  leaving the country.  Nor are illegals taking his job.  Plus he'll get a pension.  Even though he sees what I see, he tries to argue, but I got him to admit that he's banking on this enheritance.  Plus, he's racist.
> 
> Many of us don't think he'll make it.  He's always hanging out at bars with his buddies and leaves his wife at home.  I don't wish him ill, but I will laugh at him if they ever divorce.
> 
> Democrats might be tax and spenders, but repubs are borrow and spend even more.  You know which is worse.  Both need to change for the better, but one is worse.  Much worse.  Eventually gop politics is going to hurt all of us and only the rich will get thru it.
> 
> I say end the federal reserve and start all over again.  The dollar is only worth the paper it is printed on.  Socialize energy and kick speecial interest out of washington.  Corporations can't vote so why are they involved in politics?  And protect industries that are vital to America, like auto manufacturing.



Why should special interests be kicked out of Washington?  They have just as much right to their interests as you or I.  The problem is not them, it is congress for cow towing to them.  

Most of congress is who should be kicked out of Washington.  You want to start something over?  Let's start CONGRESS over, how about that?  There are NO DOUBT better candidates then what we vote for every election.  Let's give THEM a shot, and quit complaining that "our votes won't count" if we vote for someone besides who the media jacks off on a daily basis.


----------



## jreeves

Kirk said:


> The technologies will be made available when the two oil men in the White House are gone, and a Democrat is in office.



You keep laying out these "big oil" contributors, let me ask you a question did Obama support the current energy legislation that President Bush proposed?
Did John MCcain support the current energy legislation? So how again has Obama rebuked the current energy policy that is costing consumers around $4 a gallon? Just wondering....I am sure you will try and deflect from the question as this is a common practice by you.


----------



## Annie

sealybobo said:


> are you retarded?  we're not giving the oil companies anwar and offshore.
> 
> if you knew the facts, and you clearly don't, you would take 30 billion from the oil companies.  that's the solution.  before oilman bush got into office, the oil companies made 8 billion in profit.  have I lost you yet?  i'll slow down.  this yr, 40 billion.
> 
> ok, the dollar is weak.  fine, so let them keep 10 billion.  but not 40.
> 
> the oil companies sell our oil on the world market, not to us for cheap.  stupid.  giving them offshore won't save dick.
> 
> they lie about investing the money in alternative energy, so take back the tax breaks, and regulate them.  but bush apointees won't because he appointed oil men to regulate themselves.  I bet you don't know any of this.
> 
> and don't you dare say they should be able to charge whatever they want, because I bet you don't know the 00-06 gop congress passed a law that the oil companies can NEVER be charged more than $56ish dollars a barrel for oil.  Why when they gouge us?
> 
> There is no shortage of oil.  They purposely lag on refining capacity.
> 
> Here is the last fact that i'm sure will go in one ear and out the other.  They were making 8 cents on every dollar.  now they make 9.  That's not supply and demand.


And Exxon paid $3 in taxes worldwide for ever dollar of profit. Out one ear...


----------



## Ravi

Kathianne said:


> And Exxon paid $3 in taxes worldwide for ever dollar of profit. Out one ear...


So taxes don't really discourage companies from doing business, do they?


----------



## Annie

Ravi said:


> So taxes don't really discourage companies from doing business, do they?



Time will tell. So you think that paying those types of taxes is ok or should be increased?


----------



## Ravi

Kathianne said:


> Time will tell. So you think that paying those types of taxes is ok or should be increased?


I think that the oil companies should pay the same rates as any other corporation.

If that means they can't turn a profit and will go out of business I'm not going to lose any sleep over it...tough.

If they pass the costs along to us, that's okay by me as well. The only way we'll ever get angry enough to find an alternative is after we hurt from paying through the nose.


----------



## editec

Kathianne said:


> And Exxon paid $3 in taxes worldwide for ever dollar of profit. Out one ear...


 
Correction...mostly they collect taxes from the consumers and channel that money to the states and Federal government.

The're not paying those taxes, they're merely collecting them, just like every other retailer.

We saw the charts just a couple weeks ago, remember?

Mostly what they were calling _their _taxes burden turned out to be the _consumers'_ tax burden.


----------



## Charles_Main

sealybobo said:


> are you retarded?  we're not giving the oil companies anwar and offshore.
> 
> if you knew the facts, and you clearly don't, you would take 30 billion from the oil companies.  that's the solution.  before oilman bush got into office, the oil companies made 8 billion in profit.  have I lost you yet?  i'll slow down.  this yr, 40 billion.
> 
> ok, the dollar is weak.  fine, so let them keep 10 billion.  but not 40.
> 
> the oil companies sell our oil on the world market, not to us for cheap.  stupid.  giving them offshore won't save dick.
> 
> they lie about investing the money in alternative energy, so take back the tax breaks, and regulate them.  but bush apointees won't because he appointed oil men to regulate themselves.  I bet you don't know any of this.
> 
> and don't you dare say they should be able to charge whatever they want, because I bet you don't know the 00-06 gop congress passed a law that the oil companies can NEVER be charged more than $56ish dollars a barrel for oil.  Why when they gouge us?
> 
> There is no shortage of oil.  They purposely lag on refining capacity.
> 
> Here is the last fact that i'm sure will go in one ear and out the other.  They were making 8 cents on every dollar.  now they make 9.  That's not supply and demand.




Do you even know how much profit % the oil companies make Bobo? Far less than most coorperations. To make 125 Billion exxon invests 2 trillion. Why are you guys not all over other cooperations that make 2 and 3 times the profit % as oil companies? Exxon is making record profits for 2 reasons. One consolidation of companies, and 2 RECORD DEMAND!!!!

If you actually thought for yourself and not just repeated dem Taking points you might see just how messed up your view is. 

If Obama puts a windfall profit tax in oil companies, do you think even for a second that the oil companies will not just pass that cost along to all of us.

Windfall profit taxes will end up being nothing more than a back door tax on all of us.


----------



## Ravi

editec said:


> Correction...mostly they collect taxes from the consumers and channel that money to the states and Federal government.
> 
> The're not paying those taxes, they're merely collecting them, just like every other retailer.
> 
> We saw the charts just a couple weeks ago, remember?
> 
> Mostly what they were calling _their _taxes burden turned out to be the _consumers'_ tax burden.



doh!

This is very true. The end user pays the taxes.


----------



## sealybobo

Charles_Main said:


> Do you even know how much profit % the oil companies make Bobo? Far less than most coorperations. To make 125 Billion exxon invests 2 trillion. Why are you guys not all over other cooperations that make 2 and 3 times the profit % as oil companies? Exxon is making record profits for 2 reasons. One consolidation of companies, and 2 RECORD DEMAND!!!!
> 
> If you actually thought for yourself and not just repeated dem Taking points you might see just how messed up your view is.
> 
> If Obama puts a windfall profit tax in oil companies, do you think even for a second that the oil companies will not just pass that cost along to all of us.
> 
> Windfall profit taxes will end up being nothing more than a back door tax on all of us.



Yes, if McCain wins, you will be correct.


----------



## Charles_Main

sealybobo said:


> Yes, if McCain wins, you will be correct.



Good job of avoiding the questions all together. I suggest you look up how much profit per dollar invested oil companies make and compare it to most other cooperation's in this nation.

Then I suggest you go to Obama's site and read about his plans for a windfall profit tax on Oil companies, and then think long and hard about how the oil companies, who are only making about 6% profit margin, will deal with that windfall profit tax. 

or you could just make another pointless post that fails to address the issue or the questions I raised.


----------



## sealybobo

Kathianne said:


> And Exxon paid $3 in taxes worldwide for ever dollar of profit. Out one ear...



 huh?  show me so I can investigate.


----------



## sealybobo

BrianH said:


> A few cents is better than no relief yes?  And tell me exactly how you plan on magically converting everyone's automobiles to run on faith and hope?



Remember when the coffee company was going to give Kramer on Seinfeld $ and fre coffee for life, only Kramer said DEAL before they mentioned $?  That's you.  

How about they have to sell half of it to us for cheap and the other half they can sell on the world market?

saudi arabia could make more seling all their oil to europe and china, but they practically give it to their citizens.   that's because their citizens aren't  sheep and pussies.  lol


----------



## sealybobo

Kathianne said:


> And Exxon paid $3 in taxes worldwide for ever dollar of profit. Out one ear...



i'm still trying to figure out what you just said?

did they make $40 billion profit or lose $160 billion

and do you realize that after paying all their executives, probably $100 million, THEN they made these profits.  absolutely unbelievable.

you ppl would let them enslave ppl as long as it wasn't you being enslaved.  

dem talkng points?  how about you guys are house slaves.  telling us field slaves to stop complaining because massa treats us good.

I can only hope you guys suffer because you won't complain until you yourselves get fucked.

and I hate wishing ill on people, even those that deserve it.

a vote for mccain is a vote for $6 a gallon.


----------



## sealybobo

Charles_Main said:


> Good job of avoiding the questions all together. I suggest you look up how much profit per dollar invested oil companies make and compare it to most other cooperation's in this nation.
> 
> Then I suggest you go to Obama's site and read about his plans for a windfall profit tax on Oil companies, and then think long and hard about how the oil companies, who are only making about 6% profit margin, will deal with that windfall profit tax.
> 
> or you could just make another pointless post that fails to address the issue or the questions I raised.


 
most companies love making 1/10 profit increase.  oil made 14 percent increase.

dems won't let oil companies make the rules like the gop have.  that's why you don't make an oil man president.  that's why big oil gives the gop millions more than they give the dems.

just look how hard the gop is working to give them anwar and off shore.  lol


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> Remember when the coffee company was going to give Kramer on Seinfeld $ and fre coffee for life, only Kramer said DEAL before they mentioned $?  That's you.
> 
> How about they have to sell half of it to us for cheap and the other half they can sell on the world market?
> 
> saudi arabia could make more seling all their oil to europe and china, but they practically give it to their citizens.   that's because their citizens aren't  sheep and pussies.  lol



Yep the Saudis are alot better off....

While Saudis don't feel the pain at the pump, they feel it everywhere else, paying more at grocery stores and restaurants and for rent and construction material. While the country is getting richer selling oil at prices that climbed to a record $145 per barrel last week, inflation has reached almost 11 percent, breaking double-digits for the first time since the late 1970s.

"Gas prices are low here, so what?" said Muhammad Abdullah, a 60-year-old retiree. "What can I do with gas? Drink it? Take it with me to the supermarket?"

Al-Mazeen says his monthly grocery bill has doubled _ to $215 _ compared to last year, when oil was at around $70 a barrel. During that time period, the price of rice has doubled to about 72 cents a pound, and a pound of beef has gone up more than a third to about $4.

Moreover, Saudis are grappling with unemployment _ estimated at 30 percent among young people aged 16 to 26 _ and a stock market that is down 10 percent since the beginning of the year.

Many Saudis are realizing that this oil boom will not have the same impact as the one in the 1970s, which raised Saudis from rags to riches. This time, the wealth isn't trickling down as fast or in the same quantities.

One reason is the kingdom's growing population, says John Sfakianakis, chief economist at the Saudi British Bank. In the 1970s, the population of Saudi Arabia was 9.5 million. Today, it's 27.6 million, including 22 million Saudi citizens.

That means the state, which controls nearly all oil income, has to spread the wealth among more people. Besides a generous social welfare system that includes free education from pre-school through university and other benefits for citizens, the public sector employs some 2 million people and 65 percent of the budget goes to salaries.

"The state, yes, is wealthier, but the state has close to three times the amount of people it has to cater for," said Sfakianakis. "Even if Saudi Arabia had lower inflation (in the 1970s), the country and the needs of the country are bigger than what they used to be."

So the government has less room to raise wages to help people deal with higher prices. The United Arab Emirates recently hiked public sector wages by 70 percent _ but if the Saudis did the same, they would have been hit by budget deficits, Sfakianakis added.

Other Gulf nations have been hit even worse by inflation. In the UAE, inflation is expected to reach 12 percent this year, and in Qatar it's at 14 percent, according to a Merrill Lynch report earlier this year.

But those nations have much smaller populations and so can spread their oil, gas and financial riches faster and in bigger quantities to ease the pain. As a result _ contrary to their image in the West _ Saudis are far from the wealthiest people in the Gulf. The kingdom's per capita income is $20,700 _ compared with $67,000 for Qatar, which has a population of around a half million citizens.

Amid oil boom, inflation makes Saudis feel poorer


----------



## sealybobo

Charles_Main said:


> Do you even know how much profit % the oil companies make Bobo? Far less than most coorperations. To make 125 Billion exxon invests 2 trillion. Why are you guys not all over other cooperations that make 2 and 3 times the profit % as oil companies? Exxon is making record profits for 2 reasons. One consolidation of companies, and 2 RECORD DEMAND!!!!
> 
> If you actually thought for yourself and not just repeated dem Taking points you might see just how messed up your view is.
> 
> If Obama puts a windfall profit tax in oil companies, do you think even for a second that the oil companies will not just pass that cost along to all of us.
> 
> Windfall profit taxes will end up being nothing more than a back door tax on all of us.



 poor oil companies.  they still made more profits than any company ever.  

i'll spend a trillion if it will make me a $14 billion profit too.

will you defend it if tomorrow they double the price and next quarter they make $28 billion profit?

will you tell me how much it cost them to make that profit?  I won't give a shit.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> poor oil companies.  they still made more profits than any company ever.
> 
> i'll spend a trillion if it will make me a $14 billion profit too.
> 
> will you defend it if tomorrow they double the price and next quarter they make $28 billion profit?
> 
> will you tell me how much it cost them to make that profit?  I won't give a shit.



Exxon was both helped and hurt by high oil prices. 

As an oil producer, the company makes a lot of money when crude prices rise. Exxon made $10 billion from selling oil in the latest quarter, up nearly 70%.

But as a refiner, it must also buy crude oil to turn into gasoline. Exxon actually buys more crude than it sells.

Profits from its refining business totaled $1.6 billion in the quarter, less than half of what they were last year. 

"Record crude oil and natural gas realizations were partly offset by lower refining and chemical margins, lower production volumes and higher operating costs," read a statement attributed to Rex Tillerson, Exxon's chief executive.

*While oil prices in the quarter were nearly twice as high as the same time last year, gasoline prices only rose about 30%.*
Exxon sets U.S. mark for quarterly profit, misses forecasts - Jul. 31, 2008

Oil companies in the US don't control oil prices globally, even though oil prices rose by 200% the price of gas was only 30% more....


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> Yep the Saudis are alot better off....
> 
> While Saudis don't feel the pain at the pump, they feel it everywhere else, paying more at grocery stores and restaurants and for rent and construction material. While the country is getting richer selling oil at prices that climbed to a record $145 per barrel last week, inflation has reached almost 11 percent, breaking double-digits for the first time since the late 1970s.
> 
> "Gas prices are low here, so what?" said Muhammad Abdullah, a 60-year-old retiree. "What can I do with gas? Drink it? Take it with me to the supermarket?"
> 
> Al-Mazeen says his monthly grocery bill has doubled _ to $215 _ compared to last year, when oil was at around $70 a barrel. During that time period, the price of rice has doubled to about 72 cents a pound, and a pound of beef has gone up more than a third to about $4.
> 
> Moreover, Saudis are grappling with unemployment _ estimated at 30 percent among young people aged 16 to 26 _ and a stock market that is down 10 percent since the beginning of the year.
> 
> Many Saudis are realizing that this oil boom will not have the same impact as the one in the 1970s, which raised Saudis from rags to riches. This time, the wealth isn't trickling down as fast or in the same quantities.
> 
> One reason is the kingdom's growing population, says John Sfakianakis, chief economist at the Saudi British Bank. In the 1970s, the population of Saudi Arabia was 9.5 million. Today, it's 27.6 million, including 22 million Saudi citizens.
> 
> That means the state, which controls nearly all oil income, has to spread the wealth among more people. Besides a generous social welfare system that includes free education from pre-school through university and other benefits for citizens, the public sector employs some 2 million people and 65 percent of the budget goes to salaries.
> 
> "The state, yes, is wealthier, but the state has close to three times the amount of people it has to cater for," said Sfakianakis. "Even if Saudi Arabia had lower inflation (in the 1970s), the country and the needs of the country are bigger than what they used to be."
> 
> So the government has less room to raise wages to help people deal with higher prices. The United Arab Emirates recently hiked public sector wages by 70 percent _ but if the Saudis did the same, they would have been hit by budget deficits, Sfakianakis added.
> 
> Other Gulf nations have been hit even worse by inflation. In the UAE, inflation is expected to reach 12 percent this year, and in Qatar it's at 14 percent, according to a Merrill Lynch report earlier this year.
> 
> But those nations have much smaller populations and so can spread their oil, gas and financial riches faster and in bigger quantities to ease the pain. As a result _ contrary to their image in the West _ Saudis are far from the wealthiest people in the Gulf. The kingdom's per capita income is $20,700 _ compared with $67,000 for Qatar, which has a population of around a half million citizens.
> 
> Amid oil boom, inflation makes Saudis feel poorer



So our oil companies are gouging us because our poor and middle class has it better than saudi citizens?  I see.

Sounds like saudi's have the same problems we do.  Only worse.  I guess the worst is yet to come for us.  I see.

And the rich are getting richer there while the poor are getting poorer.  The Royal Family should worry that our leaders are blaming them for not producing enough oil.  We might fly airplanes into their buildings if things get much worse.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> So our oil companies are gouging us because our poor and middle class has it better than saudi citizens?  I see.
> 
> Sounds like saudi's have the same problems we do.  Only worse.  I guess the worst is yet to come for us.  I see.
> 
> And the rich are getting richer there while the poor are getting poorer.  The Royal Family should worry that our leaders are blaming them for not producing enough oil.  We might fly airplanes into their buildings if things get much worse.



No our oil companies aren't gouging us oil prices have rose by 200% while gas has rose by only 30%. If we want to get better control of oil prices, then we would drill more domestically.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> Exxon was both helped and hurt by high oil prices.
> 
> As an oil producer, the company makes a lot of money when crude prices rise. Exxon made $10 billion from selling oil in the latest quarter, up nearly 70%.
> 
> But as a refiner, it must also buy crude oil to turn into gasoline. Exxon actually buys more crude than it sells.
> 
> Profits from its refining business totaled $1.6 billion in the quarter, less than half of what they were last year.
> 
> "Record crude oil and natural gas realizations were partly offset by lower refining and chemical margins, lower production volumes and higher operating costs," read a statement attributed to Rex Tillerson, Exxon's chief executive.
> 
> *While oil prices in the quarter were nearly twice as high as the same time last year, gasoline prices only rose about 30%.*
> Exxon sets U.S. mark for quarterly profit, misses forecasts - Jul. 31, 2008
> 
> Oil companies in the US don't control oil prices globally, even though oil prices rose by 200% the price of gas was only 30% more....



The GOP congress in 2003-2005, forgot the exact yr, passed a law that said the oil companies will NEVER have to pay more than 56 dollars a barrel.  sorry bub.  totally WRONG!  they only benefit.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> No our oil companies aren't gouging us oil prices have rose by 200% while gas has rose by only 30%. If we want to get better control of oil prices, then we would drill more domestically.



first off you are wrong, but lets say their costs went up 200 percent.  ok, follow me.  if all they did was pass on the costs to us, wouldn't their profits have stayed the same?

I can't wait for your answer.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> The GOP congress in 2003-2005, forgot the exact yr, passed a law that said the oil companies will NEVER have to pay more than 56 dollars a barrel.  sorry bub.  totally WRONG!  they only benefit.



link....


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> first off you are wrong, but lets say their costs went up 200 percent.  ok, follow me.  if all they did was pass on the costs to us, wouldn't their profits have stayed the same?
> 
> I can't wait for your answer.



The price of oil rose by 200%, I didn't say their costs rose by 200%....


----------



## sealybobo

get this everyone.  the oil companies claim they are gouging us so they can have money to develop alternative energy.  lol.

but they spent more money buying back their own stock than they did drilling for oil last yr.

ok, so then wouldn't alternative energy hurt the value of their oil and stocks?  I call bs.

if they spent the money buying stock in alternative energy, i'd be more inclined to believe them.

I hope T Boone Pickens doesn't commit "suicide".


----------



## Chris

The oil companies are not going to save us from being addicted to oil. It's a ridiculous idea.

The government must provide the leadership to move us to clean energy. The Danes are doing it, the Israelis are doing it. We need to do it too. 

And the only one who will do it is Obama. Don't expect the oil company butt boy Republicans to do sh*t except make more money for Big Oil.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> The price of oil rose by 200%, I didn't say their costs rose by 200%....



American oil companies sell their oil on the world market.  So maybe since we buy most of our oil from canada, mexico and other places, maybe their prices have gone up.  But they also sell at those prices too.  So that sure is misleading, huh?  Clearly they aren't getting fucked with the current system, seeing as how their profits multiplied.  Just us.

What will you say if I show you the law that says the oil companies never have to pay more than $56 a barrel for oil they pump out of our ground.  Seems like a dumb thing to do considering they talk a big game about supply and demand.

Would that change anything?  I'll send it tomorrow from work IF you admit that it might change your opinion.


----------



## Jon

Kirk said:


> And the only one who will do it is Obama.



Only if it's the hot topic of the day.


----------



## sealybobo

Kirk said:


> The oil companies are not going to save us from being addicted to oil. It's a ridiculous idea.
> 
> The government must provide the leadership to move us to clean energy. The Danes are doing it, the Israelis are doing it. We need to do it too.
> 
> And the only one who will do it is Obama. Don't expect the oil company butt boy Republicans to do sh*t except make more money for Big Oil.



You try to explain how they are fucking us and these ppl say your facts are dem talking points and they back up their claims with right wing talking points.

these guys aren't  wrong either.  yes china's competing with us for oil and that's one reason prices are up.  yes drilling offshore should lower prices.  yes our refineries are out of date.

but there is so much more that they refuse to accept.  republicans love poor conservatives.  they are loyal like dogs.  you can beat them, starve them, make them sleep outside, but they'll always love their masters.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> You try to explain how they are fucking us and these ppl say your facts are dem talking points and they back up their claims with right wing talking points.
> 
> these guys aren't  wrong either.  yes china's competing with us for oil and that's one reason prices are up.  yes drilling offshore should lower prices.  yes our refineries are out of date.
> 
> but there is so much more that they refuse to accept.  republicans love poor conservatives.  they are loyal like dogs.  you can beat them, starve them, make them sleep outside, but they'll always love their masters.



 No it's a fact dumbass, the price of oil rose 200% globally, that's not oil companies gouging anybody...


----------



## sealybobo

Kirk said:


> The oil companies are not going to save us from being addicted to oil. It's a ridiculous idea.
> 
> The government must provide the leadership to move us to clean energy. The Danes are doing it, the Israelis are doing it. We need to do it too.
> 
> And the only one who will do it is Obama. Don't expect the oil company butt boy Republicans to do sh*t except make more money for Big Oil.



You try to explain how they are fucking us and these ppl say your facts are dem talking points and they back up their claims with right wing talking points.

these guys aren't  wrong either.  yes china's competing with us for oil and that's one reason prices are up.  yes drilling offshore should lower prices.  yes our refineries are out of date.

but there is so much more that they refuse to accept.  republicans love poor conservatives.  they are loyal like dogs.  you can beat them, starve them, make them sleep outside, but they'll always love their masters.

Democrats are the humaine society.  We come to rescue them and they think we are there to hurt them.  They might even bite us. But they will never bite their abusive masters.  Its al they know.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> get this everyone.  the oil companies claim they are gouging us so they can have money to develop alternative energy.  lol.
> 
> but they spent more money buying back their own stock than they did drilling for oil last yr.
> 
> ok, so then wouldn't alternative energy hurt the value of their oil and stocks?  I call bs.
> 
> if they spent the money buying stock in alternative energy, i'd be more inclined to believe them.
> 
> I hope T Boone Pickens doesn't commit "suicide".



Pickens supports, drilling,drilling and more drilling would you like to see a link, Hack?


----------



## jreeves

Kirk said:


> The oil companies are not going to save us from being addicted to oil. It's a ridiculous idea.
> 
> The government must provide the leadership to move us to clean energy. The Danes are doing it, the Israelis are doing it. We need to do it too.
> 
> And the only one who will do it is Obama. Don't expect the oil company butt boy Republicans to do sh*t except make more money for Big Oil.



Again, Obama voted for the current energy policy, Mccain voted against it, so again how is Obama not a vote for the same energy policy?


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> You try to explain how they are fucking us and these ppl say your facts are dem talking points and they back up their claims with right wing talking points.
> 
> these guys aren't  wrong either.  yes china's competing with us for oil and that's one reason prices are up.  yes drilling offshore should lower prices.  yes our refineries are out of date.
> 
> but there is so much more that they refuse to accept.  republicans love poor conservatives.  they are loyal like dogs.  you can beat them, starve them, make them sleep outside, but they'll always love their masters.
> 
> Democrats are the humaine society.  We come to rescue them and they think we are there to hurt them.  They might even bite us. But they will never bite their abusive masters.  Its al they know.



It's not about Democrat or Republicans, I know that's hard for you to believe. But the whole world doesn't revolve around partisanship. It's about commonsense, if you increase domestic supply and our refining capacity you will bring prices down. Coupled with a sound fiscal policy to bolster the value of the dollar.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> No it's a fact dumbass, the price of oil rose 200% globally, that's not oil companies gouging anybody...



so if i'm right that the gop passed a law that american oil companies never have to pay more than $56 a barrel, would that change your opinion in any way?  

you need to answer that before I prove anything to you.

I don't think it will matter to you.

if you will just fall back on, "the dems do it too or the oil companies give to obama too and the dems are just as bad, I assume not waste the time digging.

i'll say it again, conservatives love socializing loses and privatizing profits.

and passing that law spit in the face of supply and demand.  

and I bet if you look at what the company pays in taxes, they aren't  counting rebates, returns, credits.  I'm sure those numbers are fuzzy too.


anyways, answer my question and i'll decide if you are worthy of an education.  seriously.  I'm sick of showing when it means nothing.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> It's not about Democrat or Republicans, I know that's hard for you to believe. But the whole world doesn't revolve around partisanship. It's about commonsense, if you increase domestic supply and our refining capacity you will bring prices down. Coupled with a sound fiscal policy to bolster the value of the dollar.



No its not all about republicans.  That only half the problem.  lol

Ok smary.  You seem to know everything, why don't YOU know what exxon pays the US government for each barrel of oil they pump out of our lands. 

that's a pretty important thing you don't know, huh?

maybe you should shut the fuck up until you know what you are talking about.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> link....



seriously.  an expert like you should know this.  right?

I bet its eating you up that you don't know this.  lol

keep gogling dummy.  not easy to find is it.  that's because they don't want you to know.

another reason to listen to air america or nova m radio.

and if the mainstream/corporate media is liberal, why aren't they telling us these things.  i'll tell you, because they've been taken over.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> so if i'm right that *the gop passed a law that american oil companies never have to pay more than $56 a barrel*, would that change your opinion in any way?
> 
> you need to answer that before I prove anything to you.
> 
> I don't think it will matter to you.
> 
> if you will just fall back on, "the dems do it too or the oil companies give to obama too and the dems are just as bad, I assume not waste the time digging.
> 
> i'll say it again, conservatives love socializing loses and privatizing profits.
> 
> and passing that law spit in the face of supply and demand.
> 
> and I bet if you look at what the company pays in taxes, they aren't  counting rebates, returns, credits.  I'm sure those numbers are fuzzy too.
> 
> 
> anyways, answer my question and i'll decide if you are worthy of an education.  seriously.  I'm sick of showing when it means nothing.



Link??


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> No its not all about republicans.  That only half the problem.  lol
> 
> Ok smary.  You seem to know everything, why don't YOU know what exxon pays the US government for each barrel of oil they pump out of our lands.
> 
> that's a pretty important thing you don't know, huh?
> 
> maybe you should shut the fuck up until you know what you are talking about.



Link....or STFU


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> Again, Obama voted for the current energy policy, Mccain voted against it, so again how is Obama not a vote for the same energy policy?



ha ha!  I told you that you would fall back on this argument.

i'm not showing you shit.

you are uneducatable.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> ha ha!  I told you that you would fall back on this argument.
> 
> i'm not showing you shit.
> 
> you are uneducatable.



proof or STFU

Self admitted partisan...


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> proof or STFU
> 
> Self admitted partisan...



You don't know how much the oil companies pay America for a barrel of oil?

Don't you feel stupid?

You don't even have a guess/clue/idea what they pay.

I bet you thought they paid us $140 a barrel.  

Checkmate!


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> You don't know how much the oil companies pay America for a barrel of oil?
> 
> Don't you feel stupid?
> 
> You don't even have a guess/clue/idea what they pay.
> 
> I bet you thought they paid us $140 a barrel.
> 
> Checkmate!



Proof? Link?
This is another Skitzo episode isn't it?
Calm down and pop a pill....


----------



## RetiredGySgt

sealybobo said:


> You don't know how much the oil companies pay America for a barrel of oil?
> 
> Don't you feel stupid?
> 
> You don't even have a guess/clue/idea what they pay.
> 
> I bet you thought they paid us $140 a barrel.
> 
> Checkmate!



Since the contracts establishing what the oil companies pay or paid for oil from Government lands are much older than the last 6 months, why would you think the oil companies would be paying current prices?

You are aware they sign long term agreements with fixed prices?

And provide some prove that oil companies pay per barrel and not just lease the land.


----------



## jreeves

RetiredGySgt said:


> Since the contracts establishing what the oil companies pay or paid for oil from Government lands are much older than the last 6 months, why would you think the oil companies would be paying current prices?
> 
> You are aware they sign long term agreements with fixed prices?
> 
> And provide some prove that oil companies pay per barrel and not just lease the land.



This is what I am waiting for proof of, since bobo made the assertion....

What will you say if I show you the *law that says the oil companies never have to pay more than $56 a barrel for oil *they pump out of our ground. Seems like a dumb thing to do considering they talk a big game about supply and demand.


waiting Bobo.....


----------



## Ravi

sealybobo said:


> saudi arabia could make more seling all their oil to europe and china, but they practically give it to their citizens.   that's because their citizens aren't  sheep and pussies.  lol



It's actually because their government owns their oil and gives it to the people cheaply as a perk. Socialism, kind of/sort of.


----------



## Paulie

Ravi said:


> It's actually because their government owns their oil and gives it to the people cheaply as a perk. Socialism, kind of/sort of.



kind of/sort of?  If that's only SORT of socialism, then what would be full-blown socialism to you?


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> This is what I am waiting for proof of, since bobo made the assertion....
> 
> What will you say if I show you the *law that says the oil companies never have to pay more than $56 a barrel for oil *they pump out of our ground. Seems like a dumb thing to do considering they talk a big game about supply and demand.
> 
> 
> waiting Bobo.....



You tell me what Exxon gives the US Government for each barrel of oil.  

You did exactly what I warned you not to do.  When you were speechless, you fell back on, "obama is no better....".  So you are not worthy of explanation or proof.  Fine, call me a liar.  Or maybe I heard it on Randi Rhodes and it is very difficult to find.  

So you educate me.  Tell me what the oil companies give the USA per barrel of oil they pump out of the ground.  I'm not going to do your homework for you.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Since the contracts establishing what the oil companies pay or paid for oil from Government lands are much older than the last 6 months, why would you think the oil companies would be paying current prices?
> 
> You are aware they sign long term agreements with fixed prices?
> 
> And provide some prove that oil companies pay per barrel and not just lease the land.



Yes, I am aware that the GOP has been planning this for a long time.   

You provide me proof they just lease the land.  And are you suggesting the oil companies get the raw end of the deal on these leases?  You are a sucker.

Instead of telling people what you do know, start listening so you can understand you don't know shit.   

I get what you are saying.  You just don't seem to get what I'm saying.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

sealybobo said:


> Yes, I am aware that the GOP has been planning this for a long time.
> 
> You provide me proof they just lease the land.  And are you suggesting the oil companies get the raw end of the deal on these leases?  You are a sucker.
> 
> Instead of telling people what you do know, start listening so you can understand you don't know shit.
> 
> I get what you are saying.  You just don't seem to get what I'm saying.



Already posted in another thread, these contracts require 12.5 to 16.5 percent of all revenue generated by the wells. There are a few exceptions where deals were made to encourage drilling by forgiving the royalties below a certain threshold, all of those have LONG ago been past. The Gulf/Atlantic region Generates 8 BILLION dollars a year for the Government.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Since the contracts establishing what the oil companies pay or paid for oil from Government lands are much older than the last 6 months, why would you think the oil companies would be paying current prices?
> 
> You are aware they sign long term agreements with fixed prices?
> 
> And provide some prove that oil companies pay per barrel and not just lease the land.



Do you really think the oil companies will ever lose on a piece of land?  In other words, when it is all said and done, they will never pay more than $56 a barrel.  Can you name one piece of land where the US Government made out and the Oil companies got fucked because there really wasn't that much oil?  

Ok, they want ANWAR and Offshore.  How much are they going to pay the US government for them?  

Yes, I am aware.  Are you?


----------



## sealybobo

Ravi said:


> It's actually because their government owns their oil and gives it to the people cheaply as a perk. Socialism, kind of/sort of.



Our government owns ANWAR and Offshore too.  Why don't they give us this perk?


----------



## Ravi

sealybobo said:


> Our government owns ANWAR and Offshore too.  Why don't they give us this perk?


Because they are too busy laughing all the way to the bank as they watch the record export of gasoline from our shores to other countries.


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Already posted in another thread, these contracts require 12.5 to 16.5 percent of all revenue generated by the wells. There are a few exceptions where deals were made to encourage drilling by forgiving the royalties below a certain threshold, all of those have LONG ago been past. The Gulf/Atlantic region Generates 8 BILLION dollars a year for the Government.



Doesn't take away the fact that we are buying oil from the world market for $140 a barrel and Exxon is selling our oil on the market for $140 a barrel and because they have these contracts where they will not pay over a certain price for the oil they pump from our land, their profits have increased x 6.

That's how they went from $8 billion profit to $40 billion profit.

So this doesn't work for us.  And we shouldn't be interested in giving them ANWAR or OFFSHORE for cheap unless they share.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

sealybobo said:


> Doesn't take away the fact that we are buying oil from the world market for $140 a barrel and Exxon is selling our oil on the market for $140 a barrel and because they have these contracts where they will not pay over a certain price for the oil they pump from our land, their profits have increased x 6.
> 
> That's how they went from $8 billion profit to $40 billion profit.
> 
> So this doesn't work for us.  And we shouldn't be interested in giving them ANWAR or OFFSHORE for cheap unless they share.



Wrong again, the royalties are not just paid on oil they sell to US. The royalties are paid for all oil and gas pumped and based on the SELLING price of said oil or gas. ( Gas being natural not oil based)


----------



## sealybobo

RetiredGySgt said:


> Wrong again, the royalties are not just paid on oil they sell to US. The royalties are paid for all oil and gas pumped and based on the SELLING price of said oil or gas. ( Gas being natural not oil based)



"Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control people." 

Kissinger said that in 1970.


----------



## AllieBaba

And it seems good lefties everywhere believe it..hence their desire to control both.

Which is how I responded in the other thread where you posted this, as well...


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> And it seems good lefties everywhere believe it..hence their desire to control both.
> 
> Which is how I responded in the other thread where you posted this, as well...



Didn't you say Bush didn't commit genocide?  How many of you Conservatives have suggested making a parking lot out of the middle east.

Don't act like Bush or you are richous.  YOu are both evil and greedy and sick.


----------



## AllieBaba

sealybobo said:


> Didn't you say Bush didn't commit genocide?  How many of you Conservatives have suggested making a parking lot out of the middle east.
> 
> Don't act like Bush or you are richous.  YOu are both evil and greedy and sick.



Ok, that doesn't even make sense...but I'll pretend it does.


Bush didn't commit genocide, but the point I was making is that the fact that Hitler promoted genocide..something Bush has never done. That's a pretty big difference, dipshit.

Nobody wants a parking lot in the Middle East. We do want to be able to walk in our own streets without being at risk of being blown up, however. If we have to go to Iraq and Iran and Afghangistan and Saudi Arabia and kick ass to make that happen, then I guess that's what we'll have to do.

Unlike the civilized Europeans, who welcome them with open arms and are reaping the results of that ill-advised move.


----------



## Charles_Main

AllieBaba said:


> Ok, that doesn't even make sense...but I'll pretend it does.
> 
> 
> Bush didn't commit genocide, but the point I was making is that the fact that Hitler promoted genocide..something Bush has never done. That's a pretty big difference, dipshit.
> 
> Nobody wants a parking lot in the Middle East. We do want to be able to walk in our own streets without being at risk of being blown up, however. If we have to go to Iraq and Iran and Afghangistan and Saudi Arabia and kick ass to make that happen, then I guess that's what we'll have to do.
> 
> Unlike the civilized Europeans, who welcome them with open arms and are reaping the results of that ill-advised move.



Stop even arguing with that brainless Far left autobot.

Bobo rarely makes factual or sensible posts.

He lives in a far left dream world.


----------



## Chris

AllieBaba said:


> And it seems good lefties everywhere believe it..hence their desire to control both.
> 
> Which is how I responded in the other thread where you posted this, as well...



If we develop alternative energy, we won't need as much oil, and we won't be under the control of foreign sources.

Conserving gas and developing alternative energy is the most patriotic thing a person can do. People who drive gas hogs are unpatritotic.


----------



## TheStripey1

Angel Heart said:


> CQ Politics | House Adjourns, But Republicans Linger to Bash Democrats on Energy



Theatrics... I hope they enjoy the darkness...



Kathianne said:


> The Republicans seem to be getting their mojo back. They hear and understand that the people need relief.



And how, pray tell, will giving the oil companies more land to NOT drill on give the people relief now? They have 68 million acres they aren't drilling on NOW! Why give them more? Do you realize that if they started drilling tomorrow, that no oil from those wells would be at a refinery until 2016? How is that going to help now?

Do you really dislike caribou that much that you'd happily deprive them of their habitat just to save a nickle a gallon in 8 years?




Kirk said:


> Relief from eight years of George Bush.



Amen...



Kathianne said:


> you hope. However at this point in the election cycle, Kerry and Gore were substantially ahead of GW who WON each election. Obama is today virtually tied with the underfunded, ignored by MSM GOP candidate, McCain.



Your dream... but why? Do you actually like the lies, the secrecy, the corruption, the deceit, the wars and the accompanying death that has been prevelent these past 7+ years?

why?



BrianH said:


> All the while the Dems perfer to get their gas tax free from city and county pumps....What jerks.



All the while the Repubs perfer to get their gas tax free from city and county pumps....What jerks


----------



## TheStripey1

sealybobo said:


> "Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control people."
> 
> Kissinger said that in 1970.



He also said this a few years later...

*"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." *
~~ Henry Kissinger as quoted in the book Kiss the Boys Goodbye"


----------



## dilloduck

TheStripey1 said:


> He also said this a few years later...
> 
> *"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." *
> ~~ Henry Kissinger as quoted in the book Kiss the Boys Goodbye"



and also happens to be Jewish as hell---who woulda guessed ?


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> You tell me what Exxon gives the US Government for each barrel of oil.
> 
> You did exactly what I warned you not to do.  When you were speechless, you fell back on, "obama is no better....".  So you are not worthy of explanation or proof.  Fine, call me a liar.  Or maybe I heard it on Randi Rhodes and it is very difficult to find.
> 
> So you educate me.  Tell me what the oil companies give the USA per barrel of oil they pump out of the ground.  I'm not going to do your homework for you.



You were educating me remember, so I really need to learn, teach me. Show me that link so I can learn....


----------



## jreeves

jreeves said:


> You were educating me remember, so I really need to learn, teach me. Show me that link so I can learn....



Oh nevermind, you said you heard it on Randi Rhodes....damn I thought you were going to teach me. I guess that just goes to prove some people just talk out their asses about things they don't have a clue about. You should be real careful of the people you learn from....Umm...Ummm...Randi Rhodes


----------



## BrianH

TheStripey1 said:


> Theatrics... I hope they enjoy the darkness...
> 
> 
> 
> And how, pray tell, will giving the oil companies more land to NOT drill on give the people relief now? They have 68 million acres they aren't drilling on NOW! Why give them more? Do you realize that if they started drilling tomorrow, that no oil from those wells would be at a refinery until 2016? How is that going to help now?
> 
> Do you really dislike caribou that much that you'd happily deprive them of their habitat just to save a nickle a gallon in 8 years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amen...
> 
> 
> 
> Your dream... but why? Do you actually like the lies, the secrecy, the corruption, the deceit, the wars and the accompanying death that has been prevelent these past 7+ years?
> 
> why?
> 
> 
> 
> All the while the Repubs perfer to get their gas tax free from city and county pumps....What jerks



For one, who said they didn't?  Two, I never addressed the republicans.  Three, the story that broke the other day was about Dems....


----------



## sealybobo

TheStripey1 said:


> He also said this a few years later...
> 
> *"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." *
> ~~ Henry Kissinger as quoted in the book Kiss the Boys Goodbye"



Now you get the idea how they feel about us.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> You were educating me remember, so I really need to learn, teach me. Show me that link so I can learn....



Nope.  You won't understand anyways jreeves.  Sorry.  You broke my rule.  It wouldn't matter to you anyways so screw you.

You know it is true anyways.  What do you think Exxon pays the US per barrel?  Do you think they pay $69?  $80?  $100?  $20?  Why don't you know this smarty?


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> Oh nevermind, you said you heard it on Randi Rhodes....damn I thought you were going to teach me. I guess that just goes to prove some people just talk out their asses about things they don't have a clue about. You should be real careful of the people you learn from....Umm...Ummm...Randi Rhodes



Can you tell me since you are the expert?  Or can you explain why their profits have more than quadrupled if the only reason prices have gone up are due to supply and demand?  

Oh!  I didn't take your advice, because I'm asking a retard.


----------



## AllieBaba

Why shouldn't they have profits? They still profit to a lesser degree than most other profitable businesses.

It's envy that makes people want to put a stop to it.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Why shouldn't they have profits? They still profit to a lesser degree than most other profitable businesses.
> 
> It's envy that makes people want to put a stop to it.



What a stupid thing to say.  Maybe with your fuzzy math they do.

Explain this stupid:

Fueled by a record surge in oil prices, Exxon Mobil Corp. reported second-quarter earnings of $11.68 billion Thursday, the biggest quarterly profit ever by any U.S. corporation.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Why shouldn't they have profits? They still profit to a lesser degree than most other profitable businesses.
> 
> It's envy that makes people want to put a stop to it.



why shouldn't they have profits (said with a smart ass voice and face)

because then it is gouging dummy.

because you've been suggesting that the prices have gone up only because supply and demand and when you are proven wrong you fall back on why not?  

And because they have locked in prices that they don't have to pay more than a certain amount for the oil they take out of our country, so why should they be able to charge us whatever they want?

You know what.  You are right.


----------



## AllieBaba

But still less, percentage wise, than most (all?) major corporations.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Why shouldn't they have profits? They still profit to a lesser degree than most other profitable businesses.
> 
> It's envy that makes people want to put a stop to it.



They had profits.  Why shouldn't they have $41 billion in profits?  Because it is crashing our economy dingbat.

I seriously hate people like you.


----------



## sealybobo

jreeves said:


> Proof? Link?
> This is another Skitzo episode isn't it?
> Calm down and pop a pill....



you don't get proof when it won't matter to you anyways.  Find out yourself you filthy animal.


----------



## AllieBaba

Of course you do. You're a hate-filled elitist. You hate all those who don't think and .... not think.....like you do.

And it's fun to see you show your colors.


----------



## AllieBaba

sealybobo said:


> you don't get proof when it won't matter to you anyways.  Find out yourself you filthy animal.



In other words, he has no proof.

And please, do take the pill, or whatever it is you take, to make you human again.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Of course you do. You're a hate-filled elitist. You hate all those who don't think and .... not think.....like you do.
> 
> And it's fun to see you show your colors.



I don't mind being honest.  When I'm talking to a dumb b*&#h I sometimes can't help but say it.


----------



## AllieBaba

Still no proof. Just fanatical ramblings and hate filled rhetoric with no basis in fact.

Keep going, it's great.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> But still less, percentage wise, than most (all?) major corporations.



Percentage wise.  That's spin that only dumb shits swallow.  Bottom line is they took in $41 million.  

Before Bush took office they took in 8 billion and gas was half.

So why shouldn't they make $82 billion and why shouldn't gas be $8 a gallon once McCain gets into office?  Because that's what will happen.  If Americans are as dumb as you and refuse to wake up, why not stick it to us even more?  Screw the poor.  They don't make enough in taxes to care about them anyways so fuck it.  They can walk to work.  See, I can be evil and dumb like you guys.


----------



## AllieBaba

sealybobo said:


> Percentage wise.  That's spin that only dumb shits swallow.  Bottom line is they took in $41 million.
> 
> Before Bush took office they took in 8 billion and gas was half.
> 
> So why shouldn't they make $82 billion and why shouldn't gas be $8 a gallon once McCain gets into office?  Because that's what will happen.  If Americans are as dumb as you and refuse to wake up, why not stick it to us even more?  Screw the poor.  They don't make enough in taxes to care about them anyways so fuck it.  They can walk to work.  See, I can be evil and dumb like you guys.



You change the amount each time you refer to it. Obviously, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> In other words, he has no proof.
> 
> And please, do take the pill, or whatever it is you take, to make you human again.



Why can't you tell me what the oil companies pay the Federal Government per barrel.  

Oh, they don't pay by the barrel?  They just lease the land?  Then how much?

You don't know?  Of course you don't know.  And I'm not going to prove anything to someone who thinks the oil company should be allowed to gouge us as much as they want.  On no bid contracts?  HA!!!

We really should take back those land contracts and renegotiate with other oil companies...if that is even possible.  But I feel collusion will get in our way.  And since the GOP is in on the collusion, I guess NOTHING can be done other than give em ANWAR and Offshore and then next year we will pay $5 a gallon during the holiday season and you can blame the democratic congress.  LOL.


----------



## AllieBaba

Please. Just take the flipping pill.


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Please. Just take the flipping pill.



So you really don't know.  I bet you make enough money and don't have the same problems a lot of working Americans do.  I bet most of you do.  Some of you are broke asses, but to be flippent and say, 'why shouldn't they be able to make those profits", means $4 a gallon doesn't bother you.  Not even with your Hummer.  I bet!!!  If not,


----------



## AllieBaba

You are just such an imbecile. I hope you are young, because otherwise, it's almost a sin how ignorant and backward you are.


----------



## AllieBaba

And you elitist pig, you never did share with us..what do you do for the masses? What do you do for a living? You help them out, right?


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> And you elitist pig, you never did share with us..what do you do for the masses? What do you do for a living? You help them out, right?



I wouldn't explain anything to you because you are a horrible person.   Your mother and grandmother must be horrible ugly women too.  What did daddy do to you Clarise?


----------



## sealybobo

AllieBaba said:


> Why shouldn't they have profits? They still profit to a lesser degree than most other profitable businesses.
> 
> It's envy that makes people want to put a stop to it.



How about the fact that US Soldiers are dying in Iraq so they can safely go in and take Iraq's oil, that they will sell on the world market, and not share the profits with us?  How about that?

How about the US Taxpayers that are paying for it too.  It's time Exxon and the other oil companies start paying their own way.

Even if they paid $20 billion, they would still have $21 billion in profits this year.  

Dumb Americans.


----------



## AllieBaba

You have got a skull a mile thick. Exxon does pay its way, and the way of many, many others, dumbass. Which has nothing to do with our soldiers in Iraq.


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> Nope.  You won't understand anyways jreeves.  Sorry.  You broke my rule.  It wouldn't matter to you anyways so screw you.
> 
> You know it is true anyways.  What do you think Exxon pays the US per barrel?  Do you think they pay $69?  $80?  $100?  $20?  Why don't you know this smarty?



You made the stupid statement not me....


----------



## jreeves

sealybobo said:


> Can you tell me since you are the expert?  Or can you explain why their profits have more than quadrupled if the only reason prices have gone up are due to supply and demand?
> 
> Oh!  I didn't take your advice, because I'm asking a retard.



You make stupid statements like ummm.....

100% of the time
So your backtrack on this doesn't suprise me.


----------

