1. Saudi Arabia is sending us 1.579 million barrels per day.
2. Venezuela – 1.03 million bpd.
3. Algeria 492 thousand bpd.
4. Iraq 452 thousand bpd (so much for the “war for oil” nonsense spouted by libtards).

and

5. Kuwait 179 thousand bpd (see #4 above).

We need to drill now, even if the results won’t be felt for a while. Why?

1. Increased jobs
2. Increased demand
3. OPEC prices will drop further once we even begin to take action (seen the price of a barrel today? It’s $118 and FALLING.)

The snObama has now flip-flopped and introduced a so-called “10-Year Plan” (shades of the former USSR) to rid us of foreign oil dependence.

Apparently he can’t do math either.

His plan leaves untouched our daily doses from Canada (1,876 tbd) Mexico (1,467) Nigeria (1,048) and Angola (581). Therfore, his new sources still have to come up with the energy equivalent of 3.752 million barrels of oil a day.

That’s a big number. Obama opposes almost all new drilling, so it is fair to assume that he means to find this energy somewhere else, and for only $15 billion dollars a year.

This plan is nothing but sheer fantasy. Obama knows it and any serious observer knows it, but Obama prattles on unchallenged by MSM, but not by voters.

And certainly not by his own blinded followers, like some of the posters on this board.

The answer? Drill. Now. Often.

Regards,
Peter H.

Gene, I have no idea if we can find alternative energy sources to operate planes and ships. I imagine that some things will always need some oil-derived fuel. We still produce a significant portion of the oil that we use. It would be great if that’s all we need and not have to import oil. If offshore drilling helps in that regard, I’m all for it.

If a new energy source is developed for cars that is feasible, then instead of dumping or selling all these gasoline powered cars, we’d probably go through a transition period like we did when we switched to unleaded fuel.

Let the oil companies drill. Period.

Okay.

Gee.. how come no one analyizes the textile industry and offer their great policy ideas to secure the future for our jockstraps and socks.

I don’t know, Vince. If I regarded that as important, I’d probably analyze it, but I don’t, so I won’t. I’m assuming the Republicans analyzed ocean drilling and thought it was an excellent idea.

Let the oil companies drill. Period.

Gee.. how come no one analyizes the textile industry and offer their great policy ideas to secure the future for our jockstraps and socks.

Creation of jobs would also be great, but obviously such a plan would not be advocated if the drilling produced no oil. So the question is for the amount of oil that can be obtained is it worth it? It seems like it would be, but it appears to me that this is only a temporary measure. If it’s used as such while developing useful alternative resources and technology, while reducing our dependence on oil in the meantime, then I’m all for it. On the other hand, if it stifles development, then we’re no better than we were before, or perhaps worse. We’ll still have to deal with skyrocketing prices, and we’ll still be handing over money to terrorist harboring/supporting nations.

And there’s no video of the video that blog entry is supposed to be heralding as some sort of achievement.

Excuse me, what is this about a free media? Hello? Is this thing on? But I digress.

Fox News was able to get both radio mikes and TV cameras on the House floor, in an unprecedented attack on CSPAN’s monopoly of Congressional broadcasting. You can see the whole report here.

Of course, none of the alphabet nets or CNN, PMSNBC or their ilk even addressed the GOP House Party. Only Fox News and (briefly) the Wall Street Journal.

Bias? What liberal media bias?

Regards,
Peter H.

In your world, are those things not very helpful?

Frankly, I don’t now how helpful oil drilling would be

Think of it this way… pretend that as , I’ll make soemthuign up.. the ice on Greenland melted, that it was discovered the entire northern half of Greenland was made of solid gold.

What would that do to the price of gold on the commodity markets.. just knowing that that much new gold has been discovered even though none of it was mined yet?

I don’t [k]now how helpful oil drilling would be

It would immediately change the psychology of the markets, bringing oil down another $20/barrel.

It’s not easy to make oil show up in the right place at the right time and the current price reflects a lot of future planning, i.e., what will the demand and the available supply a year from now? such that we could guarantee a delivery of XXX amount then, at the East Timbuktu power station? CA offshore oil could be brought on in as little as a year. Some other oil fields might take 3 to 5 years. Knowing it was all coming, starting with CA offshore in a year, would strongly affect current markets.

Frankly, I don’t now how helpful oil drilling would be, but it should at least go up for a vote. The Republicans should then petition to call an emergency session there, and keep them there until there is a vote. I don’t think it will happen, because they are probably afraid the favor will be returned in the future. Yeah, it shouldn’t matter, but apparently, in Washington, playing games is more important than substance.

But if he doesn’t, here’s hoping that he puts in some Federal & Circuit Court judges in as recess appointments.

Regards,
Peter H.

Tell me again how Bush is running a police state? Tell me again how Bush is subverting Democracy?