BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[Whelland]

This is a petition that is on Sean Hannity's web site… Sponsored by Newt Gingrich… It is a petition to our US Congress and House to immediately begin searching and drilling for oil here in the US to combat the monopolistic positions of our "friends" (middle east, etc) around the world.

Pass it on to all your friends and family...

http://www.americansolutions.c.....6a1e096659

You should also watch the video. It's very informative.

[JTapia]

Done !!

[csumerall]

ditto

[Whelland]

I saw Chuck Norris on Fox News yesterday morning supporting this petition and trying to convince more people to sign it.

Chuck also said that he supports John McCain and would like to see Mike Huckabee on the ticket as a VP. I think a lot more of Chuck Norris now.

[expatriate]

Apparently this needs more push, because the Democrats just shot down a proposal to allow offshore exploration between 50 and 200 miles out. Really shows where their heads are at -- their solution to high gas prices is to tax oil company profits (a cost which they'll pass to us), while turning down proposals that would actually increase supply like offshore drilling, ANWR, or new refineries.

The big problem is China's developing economy, which is putting enormous demands on supply. China's oil imports in 1996 were 165.9 million barrels. Ten years later, that number had grown to 1,064.6 million barrels. It is currently the world's #2 consumer of oil, and they're increasing rapidly. They're currently consuming 6.5 million barrels per day, which is as much as Germany, Russia, and India combined.

We need to increase supply, but the Democrats are so beholden to the environmentalists that they're doing everything they can to get in the way. Punishing oil companies won't do a thing to drive costs down.

[csumerall]

Its due to the fact that they would like you to believe that they want cheaper gas. But, they love it when its expensive because they can blame the republicans, mass transit use goes up and all the "green" alternatvies start sounding cheap. As it stands right now ethenol will be going up so combine that with the cut in subsities for it and it cost about the same as traditional oil. Just my 2 cents anyways

[expatriate]

Good point. High gas prices equals fewer SUVs, more interest in conservation and public transportation, more interest in alternative fuels, higher prices for agricultural products (farm vote), sales of more fuel efficient cars (union vote), etc.

People can say what they want about Republicans being in bed with oil companies, but no one's mentioning any of the obvious political benefits to the Democrats. Once upon a time when the price of oil increased, the Democrats would scream about the poor widow in Chicago who couldn't afford heating oil. They now care less about the little people who can't afford to pay the bills, and more about the people who can afford the environmentalist fad and fund political campaigns.

The only problem is that they don't realize how much a farmer spends on energy, or that when people can't afford to pay their bills they won't buy new cars. The poster child of the Democratic party used to be the poor and downtrodden. Now it's a Birkenstock wearing liberal elitist driving his Prius around a college campus or Hollywood.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are happy with higher prices because they think it feeds interest in cutting our reliance on the Middle East, renewed interest in domestic exploration and relaxed environmental regulation.

So I really don't see much interest in either side about attacking the problem as long as they think it's furthering their agenda and the public isn't blaming them for it.

[Don Fischer]

expatriate wrote: Good point. High gas prices equals fewer SUVs, more interest in conservation and public transportation, more interest in alternative fuels, higher prices for agricultural products (farm vote), sales of more fuel efficient cars (union vote), etc.

People can say what they want about Republicans being in bed with oil companies, but no one's mentioning any of the obvious political benefits to the Democrats. Once upon a time when the price of oil increased, the Democrats would scream about the poor widow in Chicago who couldn't afford heating oil. They now care less about the little people who can't afford to pay the bills, and more about the people who can afford the environmentalist fad and fund political campaigns.

The only problem is that they don't realize how much a farmer spends on energy, or that when people can't afford to pay their bills they won't buy new cars. The poster child of the Democratic party used to be the poor and downtrodden. Now it's a Birkenstock wearing liberal elitist driving his Prius around a college campus or Hollywood.

Meanwhile, the Republicans are happy with higher prices because they think it feeds interest in cutting our reliance on the Middle East, renewed interest in domestic exploration and relaxed environmental regulation.

So I really don't see much interest in either side about attacking the problem as long as they think it's furthering their agenda and the public isn't blaming them for it.

I wish I had wrote that! Agree 100%!!!!!

[tim]

I am also seeing hunters, starting to defend the anti natural resources exploration. One article said he would rather have mule deer habitat than have exploratory rodes for wells and mines. etc.

So it is not just "greenies" but ourselves that don't want to see any more oil rigs in the us.

tim

[Romey]

I could well be wrong but i dont really beleive more drilling ANYWHERE is going to bring prices down. Not having enough crud oil isnt the problem.
When the big ethenol push was on in the 90`s they said how its going to make cheaper gas and states with those refineries especially would. Well price in SD is the same as Montana and ethenol is what 5 cents cheaper and i have even seen it MORE exspensive then non corn fuel? Not the dollar or so people were told.
Fuel prices in wyoming near, in or around the mines and methane are no cheaper then anywhere else, though that used to not be the case. There are alot of wells not pumping still, some on our own land, there is oil , there is the pumps yet noone has turned them on.
At anyrate noone in the goverment has any inclination of lowering the price of gas and fuel and its not going to happen even if they wanted it too unless a cap is put on refined gas and that will never happen they say becuase the goverment cant do that, which i find odd concidering they can cap a baseball players income.
Banner years for gas companies,be it opec, exxon who ever means banner bonuses for the exes,banner tax income for the goverment, banner lobby money to keep it that way. I dont beleive it will come down to 2$ a gallon or even 1.20 a gallon anymore then when it was 50 cents a gallon

[csumerall]

In all reality what we need is more operational refineries. The states and feds control the permitting of refineries. We need more. And you may see wells with oil that arent pumping due the current refinery capacities as well as long ranges to transport crude oil, which by the way is a huge pain in the butt. It is better done in large qauntities hence using pipelines and ships. There are multiple issues that need to be addressed. I think both parties tend to over simplify the current problem in order to blame the other party. There are issues that need to be dealt with and I would think a little less government would go a long ways in helping.

[fuzzybear]

These comments are sounding like conspiracy theories, led and manipulated by our own government.
If that be the case. Why is it tolerated. Shouldn't conspiracies be dealt with directly. Especially when they are led by people that took an oath to uphold to the foundation of this fine country.

If we did start pulling more crude out of the ground or off shore, for our own use. Where would we have it refined !!!!
Thanks to the environmentalists. We don't have a refinery in this country. Do you suppose it would take 1 or 2, possibly a dozen or 10 dozen to produce enough fossil fuel to supply our needs.
Where does the money come from to build these refineries?

[csumerall]

The big oil companies actually dont do most of their drilling that part is contracted out to large companies like transocean ect. The refineries are actually built and run by the oil companies. According to the things I have read we would need about 10-12 refineries running at 75% to get fuel prices back below $3. But the same people who dont want offshore drilling want refineries even less. It is very rediculus. I have worked at a few and it has gotten to the point that they do everything possible to keep them up and running because they know they wont get approval to rennovate and upgrade to a more current system. Some of these refineries are actually setting up extraction wells to pull out the spilled product from 20 years ago in order to refine it again to put on the market.

[Romey]

This was kind of my point, from a buisness sense WHY would they want to build a refinery much less several when they are having banner profits NOW? I dont beleive there is just a single reason alone that is caused the gas increase, chinas massive fuel consump[tion is also partly due it goes on and on. My point was they arent going to do anything about it becuase it would be non profitable to do so and more drilling wont do a thing, drill away, doesnt matter to me but lack of refineries, and the fact the crude will be dumped onto the work market NOT in our market means price wont come down , not with china and india. Heck we may not have refineries made but thats not true for Canada, mexico, venezuala,and any number of other countries ect and the price still stays up...