56 replies [Last post]
WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
Not good news

That's why we have both sides in this country. Conservative/Liberal. Republican/Democrat. Not to sound too Zen like, but we need that balance. By the way, there used to be a time not long ago in this country when democrats weren't nessesarily liberals and republicans weren't nessesarily conservatives. Not sure why that has changed recently.

About liberals though, if you really want something to critisize - Boulder Colorado passed a law a couple years ago that required every light bulb in the city be replaced by a lower powered less bright bulb. The reason: the older brighter city lights were drownding out the night sky and obscuring the view of the stars. Granolas putting aside safety just to have a nice view of the southern stary sky. Yeah it's sad, but this is what liberal law makers waste their time doing, passing useless laws Brick Wall,)

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Not good news

Personally, I'm quite tired of the fact that it seems impossible to discuss any issue with a liberal without it turning it into a Bush bash or a spleen vent about the war.

But as far as the hypothetical case, I say drill away if it'll get gas down below two bucks or put a hole in Ahmadinejad's pocket. If you're alluding to ANWR, I might point out that the caribou herd in the Prudhoe oilfield has grown considerably since it was developed. I haven't seen a single piece of evidence that demonstrates the existing oil field has adversely impacted wildlife. It might be out there somewhere, but I doubt it. If such data existed, it would've been trumpeted by the enviros opposing ANWR by saying, "Studies have shown that since the Prudhoe field has been developed, species X has declined by..." But no -- haven't heard a thing but supposition and rhetoric. I'm waiting in vain for fact-based science to come to the table.

Sorry to get off topic. WesternHunter has a good point -- shortsighted policies enacted by people too lazy to drive out of town to look at the stars. I'm not saying conservatives don't act out of self interest sometimes, but at least they're not hypocrites about it and claim they're not.

Offline
Location: Idaho
Joined: 12/29/2003
Posts: 74
Not good news

Follow the money...ANWR crude, like Prudhoe Bay crude will be sent directly to Japan for refining. Then Japan will ship it back to us, at a sizeable profit. In the scheme of Capitalizism, We, the PEOPLE, will see little to NO benefit from this "proposal" AT THE PUMPS. However...Haliberton and their ilk will tickled black!

We need to upgrade and increase our refining capacity. Of course that would be counter-productive to profit margins of the Oil Men. Heaven forbid President Bush and VP Cheney put the hammer down on their BUDDIES!

It's almost laughable! I see big, emboldened commercials with Washington State Reps touting their efforts to keep Cable TV affordable. MY GOSH! Aren't they the lucky ones who enjoy a fuel stipend???? Darn!!! I want one of those!

Bottom line... We voted (well, some of us.) these people in and we can vote them OUT!

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
Not good news
expatriate wrote:
Personally, I'm quite tired of the fact that it seems impossible to discuss any issue with a liberal without it turning it into a Bush bash or a spleen vent about the war.

But as far as the hypothetical case, I say drill away if it'll get gas down below two bucks or put a hole in Ahmadinejad's pocket. If you're alluding to ANWR, I might point out that the caribou herd in the Prudhoe oilfield has grown considerably since it was developed. I haven't seen a single piece of evidence that demonstrates the existing oil field has adversely impacted wildlife. It might be out there somewhere, but I doubt it. If such data existed, it would've been trumpeted by the enviros opposing ANWR by saying, "Studies have shown that since the Prudhoe field has been developed, species X has declined by..." But no -- haven't heard a thing but supposition and rhetoric. I'm waiting in vain for fact-based science to come to the table.

Sorry to get off topic. WesternHunter has a good point -- shortsighted policies enacted by people too lazy to drive out of town to look at the stars. I'm not saying conservatives don't act out of self interest sometimes, but at least they're not hypocrites about it and claim they're not.

1. Who said I was a liberal? I didn't! It seems more to me that it is impossible to discuss any issue with a die-hard CONSERVATIVE without being called a liberal, heaven forbid I should have an opinion which doesn't conform to conservativism.

2. I did not engage in any ''Bush-bashing.'' Nice try, but if you actually read that part of my post, it did not call Bush any names or generate any wacky conspiracy theories; it merely presented a hypothetical scenario involving the discovery of oil under a prime game animal breeding area.

3. I never said a word about the war; you did.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Not good news

Actually, I'm not the one who dragged Bush into the discussion. And I didn't say you said anything about the war. What I said was that it's frustrating trying to discuss an issue with some people (didn't say YOU) without it coming back to Bush or the war.

As far as mismary's position, I'm not sure where to start. If the oil is sent to Japan for refining (not sure that's true), it's because it's more affordable to send it over there for refining. I don't know about oil, but it's been done before with steel and copper. Personally, I think it's shameful that it's cheaper to send a product to Japan for refining than it is to do it in the USA. Japan's an expensive place, and it boggles me that American businesses can't compete with that.

But as far as the price of oil goes, it's all a matter of world supply. Oil is a commodity sold on a world market, and if the supply increases, the price will go down. A lot of what's going on now is pure speculation -- and it's not just oil companies. Have you noticed that whenever the price of oil drops Hugo Chavez or Amahdinejad say something crazy to increase world tensions and drive it back up? It's in Itheir best interest to convince the world they're crazy and hell bent on destruction -- it puts the price of oil through the ceiling, and their oil-based economies benefit. That generates revenue to address some of the significant social problems existing in each country..

It's not so simple as just blaming Bush, Cheney, Halliburton, etc -- it goes way beyond that.

Offline
Location: Idaho
Joined: 12/29/2003
Posts: 74
Not good news
expatriate wrote:
Actually, I'm not the one who dragged Bush into the discussion. And I didn't say you said anything about the war. What I said was that it's frustrating trying to discuss an issue with some people (didn't say YOU) without it coming back to Bush or the war.

As far as mismary's position, I'm not sure where to start. If the oil is sent to Japan for refining (not sure that's true), it's because it's more affordable to send it over there for refining. I don't know about oil, but it's been done before with steel and copper. Personally, I think it's shameful that it's cheaper to send a product to Japan for refining than it is to do it in the USA. Japan's an expensive place, and it boggles me that American businesses can't compete with that.

But as far as the price of oil goes, it's all a matter of world supply. Oil is a commodity sold on a world market, and if the supply increases, the price will go down. A lot of what's going on now is pure speculation -- and it's not just oil companies. Have you noticed that whenever the price of oil drops Hugo Chavez or Amahdinejad say something crazy to increase world tensions and drive it back up? It's in Itheir best interest to convince the world they're crazy and hell bent on destruction -- it puts the price of oil through the ceiling, and their oil-based economies benefit. That generates revenue to address some of the significant social problems existing in each country..

It's not so simple as just blaming Bush, Cheney, Halliburton, etc -- it goes way beyond that.

I cannot BELIEVE you had the GALL to step into this ANWR side-step discussion!

As an ALASKAN RESIDENT, it would stand to reason you support ANWR Drilling. As part of the Welfare State, your yearly stipend will go UP! It's a no-brainer!!! Follow the money $$$$$!

You are labeling OTHERS as hypocrites??? You've been spoon-fed PROPGANDA and you've swallowed it hook, line and sinker. You've been jaded by the color of money, Expatriate. You've been DUPED, as well.

I can hardly believe you don't know where the Prudhome Bay crude is being shipped! The difference between Ignorance and Apathy? You don't know and you really don't give a damn.....as long as that hefty $$ Stipend Check hits your mailbox!

ANWR may be great for Alaska and the OIL Men, but it will make ZERO Difference as to what we, the lower 48, pay at the pumps. But you can BET the Lower 48 will be paying the majority of the Bill!

As ANWR pertains to/affects the Deer, Elk, Caribou populations, I admit, I'm unclear. I'm more concerned about the reintroduction of Wolves.

Wake up, or....Choke on this:
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/04/28/224218.php

Offline
Location: Missouri/Arkansas
Joined: 08/21/2003
Posts: 891
Not good news

At 32 MPG, $2.71 isn't quite Armageddon.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Not good news

Mismary:
Therein lies the problem -- all emotion and rhetoric, no facts. Heaven forbid I have the GALL to actually voice an opposing view. I'm entitled to it -- it's called the First Amendment. Deal with it. How dare you say I have a lot of gall to engage in the discussion -- I live, hunt and vote here. I've got every right and, as a registered voter, the responsibility to engage in political discussion in my state.

In my opinion, you've got a lot of nerve to sit down there in the Lower 48 preaching to me that you know more about my state than I do. By the way, it's "Prudhoe" not "Prudhome."

This isn't that different from the wolf discussion -- people from outside dismissing the local population as ignorant rubes. But then, that's another one of my pet peeves -- people who come up with prejudicial reasons to exclude someone from the discussion rather than actually discussing ideas on merit.

And while you're at it, you might expand your mind a bit to think beyond the permanent fund. That certainly isn't the driving factor in my decision. Alaskans think a lot more about their environment than what you think. I'm all for development if it doesn't destroy ecosystems. Given the lack of evidence that Prudhoe is destroying wildlife, I'm OK with it.

But at any rate, kudos for coming up with an emotion-filled rant that attempts to pigeonhole me as some sort of stooge, and yet cleverly side-steps the issue of whether or not Prudhoe development has adversely impacted wildlife. I have a lot of problems with ad hominem attacks rather than dealing with facts. Political discourse should be about the interchange of ideas, not simply labeling and discrediting those who deliver them.

Offline
Location: Idaho
Joined: 12/29/2003
Posts: 74
Not good news

GOOD MORNING, Expatriate! The Coffee is on..........

Well, Dern it! I inadvertantly added an "m" to Prudhoe. My Bad. "Emotion-filled"? You betcha. And you've not offered one iota of evidence that anything I've written is not factual. I think you've got that Ignorance and Apathy Theory down to a Science.

Perhaps it IS better to accept your silence on these side-issues and allow your silence to speak for itself. You keep your Gall, Expatriate...it makes for interesting, hypocritical fodder. You've spoken like a true politician! Forgive me for not taking a bow.

You wrote: "But at any rate, kudos for coming up with an emotion-filled rant that attempts to pigeonhole me as some sort of stooge, and yet cleverly side-steps the issue of whether or not Prudhoe development has adversely impacted wildlife."

Oh Dear!! Must I refresh your memory? I already stated I was unclear about the ramifications of ANWR Drilling. Evidently, reading comprehension is not your strong suite.

You "Pigeon-holed" yourself. Your trivial, impotent, bait-and-switch outburst can't un-ring the Bell.

I am curious as to the meaning of your handle "EXPATRIATE" now. Care to elaborate? Of course... you can always invoke your Fifth Ammendment Rights! ;-)

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
Not good news

Mismary, you amaze me with the way you build arguments.

I stated that there's no evidence to show that Prudhoe development has adversely affected wildlife, and have challenged you to come up with something that says it has. There are studies that back my position. Your proof of whatever point you're trying to make is to say that I haven't proven that your claims aren't factual. The way logic works is you make a claim and back it with facts. Proof does not mean something's true until someone proves it untrue. By your definition, we must accept the existence of bigfoot, the chupacabra, space aliens and the second shooter as scientific fact because no one has positively proven that they DON'T exist.

What bell am I trying to unring? Your belief that an increase in oil supply won't drop prices? If you like, we can take discussion about Adam Smith and the law of supply and demand to another thread.

This thread is supposed to be about wolf reintroduction, and my point continues to be that such issues ought to 1) be based on facts, not rhetoric, and 2) take the local populations views into account. IMO the ANWR debate bears a lot of similarity because people ratchet up the rhetoric and emotion to cover a lack of facts or willingness to actually debate them. The more you talk, the more you underscore my point.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like

ThreadThread StarterRepliesLast Updated
Virus kills deer in Corvallis neighborhood4point_109/08/2010 22:52 pm
Good News/Bad NewsCa_Vermonster704/04/2012 06:45 am
Good News About Our Right Wing KingCVC3107/11/2008 08:36 am
Good News Storyexpatriate212/27/2005 14:41 pm
The good and the badpeanut64510/21/2005 08:26 am