PDA

View Full Version : inmates running the assylum



M. Robinson
11-11-2011, 11:05 AM
OK...so now Darrel Hannah and (multi billionaire daughter) Julia Luis Dreyfus as well as a bunch of C List actors are shaping U.S. policy. Obama is siding with the anti XL Pipeline protesters and has delayed a decision till after the election. Now...that is really taking an informed stance....Prevaricator in Chief.
Here we go again.....unintended consequences.

If you have any interest at all in the secure future for a safe, constant and ethical oil source..take the time to watch this.

ahttp://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1270448710001

Gerry Clinchy
11-11-2011, 01:33 PM
Great video! Newt hit the nail on the head with "voting present" on the pipeline that could mean good jobs for both countries. And I think it's a better idea to buy oil from Canada (if we have to buy it from a "foreign" country), than it is to depend on the Arabs.

Wonder if Obama might have caught the tidbit that the oil companies buy more trucks from GM than anybody else?

Also a nice piece on the insanity of using microchips in the military that were made in China! Are we totally nuts? Not to mention, I'm glad I don't have to travel over that CA bridge built with Chinese material. Just ask the people who had Chinese wallboard in their new homes a few years back! Have we not learned that the track record is that Chinese parts and materials only "appear" cheaper ... until they start to implode?

When I bought my last desktop computer, it was "built" by a small company locally. One of the things they told me was that most "cheapie" computers use the Intel chip, but the rest of the chips in the machines are not USA-made. They use only USA chips. It's been a great machine, and I like knowing that I don't have Chinese chips in it.

It was NOT that much more expensive (if at all) than a Dell or HP; and I was able to get it configured as I wanted. At the time Dell or HP required that you pay extra if you wanted XP. Vista had just come out, and Vista was what was "packaged". With the local company, I got a choice of XP or Vista as "standard equipment" without an extra charge.

BonMallari
11-11-2011, 01:43 PM
when you get the tree hugging,Prius driving Hollyweird,pseudo celebs, along with a willing media, the American public usually takes it in the shorts..everything this administration does is calculated toward re election 2012

HPL
11-11-2011, 04:18 PM
OK...so now Darrel Hannah and (multi billionaire daughter) Julia Luis Dreyfus as well as a bunch of C List actors are shaping U.S. policy. Obama is siding with the anti XL Pipeline protesters and has delayed a decision till after the election. Now...that is really taking an informed stance....Prevaricator in Chief.
Here we go again.....unintended consequences.

If you have any interest at all in the secure future for a safe, constant and ethical oil source..take the time to watch this.

ahttp://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1270448710001
Is it still there. I can't get to it. I keep getting a can't find the server message.

Buzz
11-11-2011, 04:48 PM
I live next door to the guy who is in charge of that pipeline project. Interestingly they plan to use a pot load of 4000 HP pump motors along the pipeline that I helped design while I was at Siemens.

He seems to think that if re-elected, Obama will get the thing approved. He just doesn't want to alienate some of his base before the election. We both have spent time in the energy industry. We were talking about it and we both believe that the vast majority of the public, on both sides of the issue, are very uninformed when it comes to energy issues. And surprise, we both feel that we need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem. In other words, we have to invest in fossil and in alternatives and renewables. It's the only sane approach.

This is one area where I part ways very dramatically with some on the left.

BonMallari
11-11-2011, 04:54 PM
I live next door to the guy who is in charge of that pipeline project. Interestingly they plan to use a pot load of 4000 HP pump motors along the pipeline that I helped design while I was at Siemens.

He seems to think that if re-elected, Obama will get the thing approved. He just doesn't want to alienate some of his base before the election. We both have spent time in the energy industry. We were talking about it and we both believe that the vast majority of the public, on both sides of the issue, are very uninformed when it comes to energy issues. And surprise, we both feel that we need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem. In other words, we have to invest in fossil and in alternatives and renewables. It's the only sane approach.

This is one area where I part ways very dramatically with some on the left.

spot on Buzz...

Gerry Clinchy
11-11-2011, 05:00 PM
Is it still there. I can't get to it. I keep getting a can't find the server message.

When you click on the URL, just remove the portion before the "www..." and it will take you there.

I had trouble the first time, and actually found a different video on the same topic ... which was every bit as good as this one. It was in the video I found by mistake that mentioned the # of GM trucks the oil industry buys.

In fact, Buzz this video says the very thing you guessed ... Obama is just putting this off until after the election to keep the environmentalists happy, and will approve it after the election ... then when that brings some enthusiasm for future job growth, he will look like a hero.

BonMallari
11-11-2011, 05:04 PM
When you click on the URL, just remove the portion before the "www..." and it will take you there.

I had trouble the first time, and actually found a different video on the same topic ... which was every bit as good as this one. It was in the video I found by mistake that mentioned the # of GM trucks the oil industry buys.

In fact, Buzz this video says the very thing you guessed ... Obama is just putting this off until after the election to keep the environmentalists happy, and will approve it after the election ... then when that brings some enthusiasm for future job growth, he will look like a hero.

gonna be hard for him to approve it when he doesnt get re elected....my guess is that he does it just before election time, so when gas prices are at an all time high he can claim he brought them down

Gerry Clinchy
11-11-2011, 05:10 PM
gonna be hard for him to approve it when he doesnt get re elected....my guess is that he does it just before election time, so when gas prices are at an all time high he can claim he brought them down

That could also be a good gimmick for him to use if the campaign is not going so well.

I'd guess that there's going to be some brouhaha over this. Starting in Canada, and will blossom in the US from there.

M. Robinson
11-11-2011, 06:59 PM
should have done a test run..

www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1270448710001

and FYI Ezra Levant has a very disturbing and interesting book..Ethical Oil...worthwhile reading.

caryalsobrook
11-11-2011, 08:03 PM
I live next door to the guy who is in charge of that pipeline project. Interestingly they plan to use a pot load of 4000 HP pump motors along the pipeline that I helped design while I was at Siemens.

He seems to think that if re-elected, Obama will get the thing approved. He just doesn't want to alienate some of his base before the election. We both have spent time in the energy industry. We were talking about it and we both believe that the vast majority of the public, on both sides of the issue, are very uninformed when it comes to energy issues. And surprise, we both feel that we need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem. In other words, we have to invest in fossil and in alternatives and renewables. It's the only sane approach.

This is one area where I part ways very dramatically with some on the left.

Hm. Wasn't it the president that has been harping that politics should be put aside and DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE COUNTRY??? Hippocrit??

Gerry Clinchy
11-11-2011, 08:13 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/11/keystone-pipeline-decision-political-ploy-or-political-problem/




Administration officials, though, deny politics was in any way at play.

"This is not a political decision. We have been ... out there as listening to what the public has to say," said Kerri-Ann Jones, an environmental official in the State Department (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/state-department.htm#r_src=ramp).
Really?



"The administration chose to support environmentalists over jobs -- job-killers win, American workers lose," Terry O'Sullivan, president of the Laborers' International Union of North America, said in a written statement.

Uncle Bill
11-12-2011, 12:33 PM
I live next door to the guy who is in charge of that pipeline project. Interestingly they plan to use a pot load of 4000 HP pump motors along the pipeline that I helped design while I was at Siemens.

He seems to think that if re-elected, Obama will get the thing approved. He just doesn't want to alienate some of his base before the election. We both have spent time in the energy industry. We were talking about it and we both believe that the vast majority of the public, on both sides of the issue, are very uninformed when it comes to energy issues. And surprise, we both feel that we need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem. In other words, we have to invest in fossil and in alternatives and renewables. It's the only sane approach.

This is one area where I part ways very dramatically with some on the left.


Just AMAZING!!! I'm becoming more convinced than ever, that if we keep you in Sodak long enough, you will stop turning blue.:rolleyes:

But since you've had a moment of clarity, please explain how BHO could pander to small crowd of environmental whackos, as compared to the plethora of unionistas that got aced out of all those jobs? Evidently he figures the thugs have no where to go, but he may get a backlash from the whackos?

UB

Gerry Clinchy
11-12-2011, 02:59 PM
And surprise, we both feel that we need to throw everything including the kitchen sink at the problem. In other words, we have to invest in fossil and in alternatives and renewables. It's the only sane approach.


Thank you, Buzz. I've been saying that for a long time.

Whatever fossil fuels we have left are the "bridge" to keep the economy chugging until we can find suitable alternatives.

Prioritization wouldn't hurt. Work on an alternative to the internal combustion auto engine, while we tackle home-used energy. At least the latter doesn't have to be "portable" like energy for a car.

However, not a good thing for govt to give loans & grants to do this, i.e. pick the winners and losers. I think history shows that those who have skin in the game are the ones most highly motivated to find innovations that are commercially viable.

M. Robinson
11-12-2011, 05:29 PM
Is it possible that Obama made this decision partly to appease his hard left base and partly to foil the Koch brothers?? I would imagine they had some skin in the XL Pipeline game. They may be the only Conservative playmakers in the same league as George Soros.

Gerry Clinchy
11-18-2011, 11:12 PM
http://www.fuelingus.org/57-house-members-voice-support-keystone-xl

Thu, 11/17/2011 - 13:00
The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to express our deep frustration over news that a decision on the Keystone XL Project will be further delayed until after next year’s presidential election. The decision by Nebraska’s legislature to vote on this project without any delay shows the American people’s resolve to create jobs and ensure our energy security. We ask you to take action before the end of the year in line with the Department of State’s longstanding public timeline.

As you know, the permit application for the Keystone XL Project was submitted over three years ago, in September of 2008. Since then, this controversial pipeline has undergone three stages of public environmental impact studies (draft, supplemental, and final) as well as detailed, public economic and national security reviews by myriad academics, consultants, and experts. The Keystone XL Project’s unusually protracted permit application process has allowed ample time and opportunity for public debates and investigations. Any further delay in this process will only be viewed as placing political gain over the U.S. economy and security.

Satisfying America’s future energy needs will require a willingness to commit to a variety of resources and technologies. Natural disasters and volatile political climates in places like the Middle East and Venezuela mean the global oil supply will remain susceptible to disruption with potentially severe impacts on the global economy and our national security. Canadian oil, combined with domestic fossil fuels and alternative energy innovations, will go a long way toward determining our country’s energy security. Construction of the pipeline will create thousands of jobs and inject millions of dollars into local economies. While the Keystone XL Project cannot solve America’s energy crisis alone, it is a necessary step for the U.S. economy, U.S. national security and U.S energy needs.

Mr. President, the American people should not have to watch this job creating project fail because of partisan concerns; our national security and economy are too important. The time to make a decision is now.

Respectfully,

Connie Mack
Tim Holden
Doug Lamborn
Michael Conaway
David Rivera
Donald Manzullo
Charles Boustany
Shelley Moore Capito
Bobby Schilling
John Duncan
Kevin Brady
Aaron Schock
Tom Cole
Albio Sires
Marsha Blackburn
Tom McClintock
Bill Posey
Andy Harris
Tom Petri
Jeff Landry
Bill Huizenga
Mac Thornberry
Francisco Canseco
Richard Nugent
Jeff Duncan
Joe Wilson
Michael McCaul
Dan Burton
Martha Roby
Steve Chabot
Joe Walsh
Ed Royce
Bill Flores
Lynn Jenkins
Jeff Miller
Cathy McMorris Rodgers
Tim Griffin
Paul Broun
Candice Miller
Mary Bono Back
Renee Ellmers
Lou Barletta
Sam Johnson
Jean Schmidt
Howard Coble
Alan Nunnelee
Mike Coffman
Tom Reed
Ann Marie Buerkle
Joe Pitts
Cynthia Lummis
Tom Rooney
Mike Kelly
Gus Bilirakis
Wally Herger
Tom Marino
Mario Diaz-Balart






Can't find the source, but the gist now seems to be that the State Dept. will require another study of the re-routing of the pipeline; which study should take another 12 to 18 mos.

Just when you think they couldn't be more insane, they prove they can be.

HPL
11-18-2011, 11:30 PM
OK...so now Darrel Hannah and (multi billionaire daughter) Julia Luis Dreyfus as well as a bunch of C List actors are shaping U.S. policy. Obama is siding with the anti XL Pipeline protesters and has delayed a decision till after the election. Now...that is really taking an informed stance....Prevaricator in Chief.
Here we go again.....unintended consequences.

If you have any interest at all in the secure future for a safe, constant and ethical oil source..take the time to watch this.

ahttp://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1270448710001
I don't understand the reference to Julia Luis Dreyfus as Darrel Hannah's daughter.

M. Robinson
11-21-2011, 06:14 PM
I don't understand the reference to Julia Luis Dreyfus as Darrel Hannah's daughter.

Read it again.........

William Louis-Dreyfus (born Gérard C. Louis-Dreyfus; 1932) is a French-born American businessman. With his family's net worth estimated at $2.9 billion by Forbes, he is one of the richest men in the world.[1] He is the chairman of Louis Dreyfus Energy Services and the great grandson of Léopold Louis-Dreyfus, founder of Louis Dreyfus Group.[2] He is the father of Emmy and Golden Globe winning actress Julia Louis-Dreyfus.

Gerry Clinchy
12-17-2011, 01:34 PM
So, Congress passed a bill to keep the govt running for another two months (could anyone run a business this way?) ... and dropped in there a requirement that the POTUS make a decision on the Keystone pipeline within 60 days.

First the WH said that he'd veto any such bill if tied into the pipeline ... however, in this case he only has to make a decision on the permit in 60 days. That decision could be a negative one. In fact, a WH source indicated that the decision would likely be to NOT issue the permit.

The R's can keep putting the pressure on him to issue the permit, and he can keep deferring doing so. Might not get the permit issued before his own agenda stipulated, but it sure won't look great for re-election if he rejects doing so 3 or 4 times. OTOH, maybe he'll wait till just before the election so that the unions will get warm and fuzzy about him again before it's time to vote?

Uncle Bill
12-17-2011, 02:06 PM
So, Congress passed a bill to keep the govt running for another two months (could anyone run a business this way?) ... and dropped in there a requirement that the POTUS make a decision on the Keystone pipeline within 60 days.

First the WH said that he'd veto any such bill if tied into the pipeline ... however, in this case he only has to make a decision on the permit in 60 days. That decision could be a negative one. In fact, a WH source indicated that the decision would likely be to NOT issue the permit.

The R's can keep putting the pressure on him to issue the permit, and he can keep deferring doing so. Might not get the permit issued before his own agenda stipulated, but it sure won't look great for re-election if he rejects doing so 3 or 4 times. OTOH, maybe he'll wait till just before the election so that the unions will get warm and fuzzy about him again before it's time to vote?


Just another joke from the linguine-spined Congress that keeps kicking the can down the road. Makes me sick! Get a backbone you bastards!

Doesn't matter to him if this cuts down union jobs...where are they going??? Certainly not to the Republican candidate. Obama knows he has the unionistas in the bag, but he needs all the $$$ he can squeeze from those environmental whackos and hollywierd types.

UB

paul young
12-17-2011, 05:47 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/05/news/economy/gasoline_export/index.htm


this would suggest the blame for high fuel prices should be placed elsewhere. the oil companies are making a boatload of money exporting it, though, so don't hold your breath.

the proposed pipeline will get built and they'll profit even more.

the oil companies have the whole world by the balls.......-Paul

charly_t
12-17-2011, 06:15 PM
I keep remembering the two oil spills on our little farm and the ground it ruined. Oil or grease is very harmful to eggs ( fowl eggs at least ). My family likes to hunt and I see that future harmed for other people if this pipeline is not built correctly. We no longer own any land except this small home sight but I hate to think of the harm this could possibly do if it is not done right. I sure do not trust oil companies wether large or small and the government is even worse sometimes ! And on a very serious note..........you sure as blue blazes can't raise a crop on the land where the spill happens to be.

Gerry Clinchy
12-17-2011, 06:25 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/05/news/economy/gasoline_export/index.htm


this would suggest the blame for high fuel prices should be placed elsewhere. the oil companies are making a boatload of money exporting it, though, so don't hold your breath.

the proposed pipeline will get built and they'll profit even more.

the oil companies have the whole world by the balls.......-Paul

Wasn't it OPEC that decided to "control" crude production to keep the price of crude higher to benefit themselves? Then the futures speculators impact the pricing as well.

So, the oil companies are making a boatload of money as a result.

Have to agree with Franco ... if the US announced increase in production; and the Keystone pipeline got its permit so that more Canadian oil got to the market (US & Canada not being members of OPEC), then it could provoke OPEC to produce more & the cost to go down ... all a game of the futures speculation.

I remember some theorizing that if the US released some of its crude reserves, that, alone, might impact the global market price for crude.

However, as you mention if refining oil to gas here makes US jobs & gives a better trade balance for the US, and that grows the economy here ... then the higher price becomes less of a hardship if people have jobs.

Gerry Clinchy
07-28-2012, 05:37 PM
From Breitbart today:

When President Barack Obama blocked the Keystone Pipeline, Republicans said the move would encourage Canada to pursue oil deals with China instead of the United States and cede a massive chunk of North American oil assets to the communist nation. Now, with China's state-run oil company CNOOC poised to cut a $15.1 billion deal--the largest ever foreign acquisition for a Chinese company--with Canadian oil company Nexen, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are in full backpedal mode.

In a draft letter to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), Sen. Schumer writes (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/27/us-usa-congress-cnooc-idUSBRE86Q02T20120727):

I respectfully urge you, in your capacity as chairman of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), to withhold approval of this transaction to ensure U.S. companies reciprocal treatment.

Similarly, Rep. Pelosi is now sounding alarms of concern. In a statement, Pelosi spokesperson Drew Hamill said:

This deal prompts great concern about the Chinese government's continued attempts to use its state-owned enterprises to acquire global energy resources.

Saying "I told you so" offers little solace to concerned Republican lawmakers.

"Do we really want to be buying our oil or Canadian oil back from the Chinese?" said Sen. John Hoeven (R-NE). "If we don't take action to develop our resources and work with our closest friend and ally Canada, that's exactly what's going to happen."
---------------
Will these guys now stop taking Canada for granted?

Wonder how this will impact the votes in November.

Obama is supposed to be such a smart politician, but if he didn't see this coming, I'd have to argue that assessment.

Uncle Bill
07-28-2012, 06:12 PM
Just a small correction, Gerry.

"Do we really want to be buying our oil or Canadian oil back from the Chinese?" said Sen. John Hoeven (R-NE). "If we don't take action to develop our resources and work with our closest friend and ally Canada, that's exactly what's going to happen."

I'm not sure where the original statement came from, but they have the wrong state for John Hoeven. He's from N.D.

He's right on, however, and we have the 'messiah' to thank for this to even be a consideration.

UB

Uncle Bill
07-28-2012, 06:22 PM
And here's an "Oh by the way", report that may be of interest to some. UB

Thanks Fracking: North Dakota Oil Production Could Outpace Persian Gulf Importshttp://sayanythingblog.com/files/2012/07/Bakken-ND-2685-300x198.jpg







Written By:
Rob Port (http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/author/admin/)
Jul 25, 2012



Big news today about North Dakota’s Bakken oil boom is a projection showing oil production tripling by 2025 (http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/event/article/id/60022/group/homepage/):

A new study says North Dakota’s oil production could jump more than threefold by 2025 to more than 2 million barrels a day.

The study released Wednesday by Bentek Energy LLC of Colorado also says natural gas production could more than quintuple by 2025 in the Williston Basin. The basin includes the Dakotas and Montana.
There is some reason to doubt this project. Oil prices are down, causing concern in some quarters, and rig counts are leveling off. And it’s hard to imagine North Dakota keeping up the level of explosive growth we’ve seen over the last couple of years for another 13 years.

But supposing it’s true, it could mean that North Dakota alone would offset 100% of the oil currently coming from the Persian Gulf. “If oil production in North Dakota increases to 2 million barrels per day from current daily production of 639,000 barrels, that would be more than enough domestic oil to completely offset current daily U.S. imports of 1.86 million barrels from all of the Persian Gulf countries combined!” writes Mark Perry (http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/07/energy-fact-of-day-north-dakota-oil.html).

Of course, that almost certainly wouldn’t mean an end to imports from the Persian Gulf as US oil consumption will climb steadily during that time as well.

But it is amazing to consider. After the years of griping about foreign oil from the Persian Gulf region, that oil production in one US state could eclipse those imports is astounding.

And there are a lot of positive diplomatic ramifications for lowering demand for oil produced in troubled parts of the world.

2goldens
07-28-2012, 11:12 PM
http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?77584-inmates-running-the-assylum

Thank you for putting this out there...I "shared" on Facebook.

Gerry Clinchy
07-29-2012, 09:03 AM
Let's not forget that oil and NG consumption in the US will increase ... since the present EPA seems determined to make coal a mortal sin. The price of oil and NG better go down a lot, since my electric bill continues to increase.

Since I'm in PA, which has long used quite a lot of coal for generation, the new rules on coal plants (both for building new ones, and "fixing" old ones) is likely having an impact on the cost of electricity here.

If we want to talk "taxes" ... we shouldn't forget the "hidden" tax of increased costs for basic needs due to govt regulation.

We might need that health care from Obamacare even more than we think. FOTUS wants everyone to eat better, even as the cost of healthy foods continues to increase. Not something she's likely to notice from where she stands ... as the cost of growing and transporting them increases.