11
   

JOHN McCAIN AN ENERGY HYPOCRITE?

 
 
McGentrix
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 12:56 pm
@FreeDuck,
The name on the Resolute desk for starters.

His platform is out there and efforts have been made to discuss it here. It usually gets fubared quickly by the left into a discussion about something else though.

I don't see how having a Dem mojority in congress and a Dem pres is going to change much. I mean beyond the fact that change is all I will have in my pocket when they get done thrashing the economy.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 01:21 pm
Drill, Baby, Drill!

Sell, Baby, Sell!

Drill it and Sell it to Japan! Yeah Baby!

http://wyden.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=302677&


0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 01:48 pm
@FreeDuck,
McCain is not married to the Republican Party as we all know from his work in the Senate.

As an independant, I find that refreshing that a man will govern according to his principals rather than his party line.

Has Obama ever went against his party? NO!!!
Cliff Hanger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 02:26 pm
@Woiyo9,
Obama voted against the Dems here:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/09/fisa_vote/

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 03:54 pm
@Woiyo9,
As an independant, I find that refreshing that a man will govern according to his principals rather than his party line
_________________________________


QAre you even living on the same planet??
Wheres Johny has voted strait up GWB's ass over 90% of the time .

After the "embrace" hes been a good party toadie
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 03:55 pm
@McGentrix,
I don't see how having a Dem mojority in congress and a Dem pres is going to change much. I mean beyond the fact that change is all I will have in my pocket when they get done thrashing the economy
__________________________________
TRULY McG-Theres not much left in the coffers after our dear little GW has gotten done squandering 3/4 Billion A DAY in Iraq.
Debra Law
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 05:13 pm
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote: "McCain has the plan to begin a multi faceted approach which should include drilling as a temporary measure while other long term development projects begin . . . You want change, vote for McCain."

The problem, however, is that McCain cannot FORCE oil and gas companies to drill if it is economically infeasible for them to do so. Take Alaska, for instance. Three major oil companies own the majority of the leases on the Alaskan North Slope, but Governor Palin's hiked up severance taxes reduce their incentives to explore and develop additional wells. Choose: Capitalism vs. Socialism. The oil companies are not in business to make the socialistic State of Alaska uber-rich. While the Alaska First platform is attractive to Sarah Palin, it does little to serve the interests of the rest of the nation.


Alaska --Severance Tax: Governor Signs Petroleum Profits Tax Legislation
http://www.centerfortaxstudies.com/blog/taxnews/2007/12/27/alaska_severance_tax_governor_signs_petr

The citizens of Alaska do not pay state taxes. Why shouldn't they exploit THEIR resources and make the oil companies pay most of their bills at the expense of the rest of the nation?

In 2004, the State of Alaska collected $ 647 million in severance taxes and this constituted 50.2 percent of its total state tax collections.

In 2007, the State of Alaska collected $2.2 billion in severence taxes and this constituted 64.4 percent of its total state tax collections.

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/fiscal/severtax.htm

Palin has taxed the oil companies out of the new exploration, development and drilling business in the State of Alaska. So, both McCain and Palin can chant, drill, baby, drill all they want --but you can't force the companies to drill in order to make Alaska uber-rich.









firefly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 05:24 pm
@Debra Law,
Perhaps we should reconsider plans for offshore drilling, based on these revelations:

http://able2know.org/topic/122283-1#post-3396909

And we want more,"Drill, baby, drill"?

I wonder whether McCain will even address this scandal. The Democrats are weighing-in about it.

Quote:
Democrats used the report to accuse President Bush's administration of being too close to the oil industry.

"The Bush administration put an 'America for Sale' sign on the White House lawn from day one and has been courting Big Oil ever since," Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York and chairwoman of the House Rules Committee, said in a written statement. "Democrats have been saying it for some time, but this proves it. This administration is literally in bed with Big Oil. Little did we know they were such a cheap date."

Sen. Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat, said the report should make Congress reconsider plans to expand offshore drilling.

"The rest of the United States government doesn't need to jump in bed with" the oil industry, he said.

"Offshore drilling will not solve our energy crisis nor will it bring down prices at the pump," Nelson said. "Instead, it will enrich the oil companies and reward the culture of corruption that has been fostered, funded and now exposed by the inspector general."

cnn.com
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 05:25 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

As an independant, I find that refreshing that a man will govern according to his principals rather than his party line
_________________________________


QAre you even living on the same planet??
Wheres Johny has voted strait up GWB's ass over 90% of the time .

After the "embrace" hes been a good party toadie


He voted with the Republican causus on Republican issues. Go figure. If had voted against them, he wouldn't make a very good Republican nominee for President now would he?

The only people that actually care about it are those that are going to vote against him anyways.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 05:34 pm
Quote:
The Alaska tax is imposed on the net profit earned on each barrel of oil pumped from state-owned land, after deducting costs for production and transportation, which are currently estimated at just under $25 a barrel.

The tax is set at its highest rate in Prudhoe Bay, where the state takes 25 percent of the net profit of a barrel when its price is at or below $52.

The percentage then escalates as oil prices rise over that benchmark. Alaska gets about $49 of a $120 barrel, not counting other fees.

ConocoPhillips said that in total, once royalty payments and other taxes are added in, the state captures about 75 percent of the value of a barrel.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008103325_alaskatax07.html

0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  3  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 05:42 pm
@farmerman,
There could be quite a bit left if the Dems would stop spending it on crap.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 06:54 pm
@McGentrix,
McG, youre revisionist **** sometimes becomes a bit obvious

1. The Bridge to nowhere , etc were all parts of the GOP "Pork Congress" that has not shown any measure of reduced spending in the 12 years that the GOP has been in power on Capitol Hill, why not?.

2 GOP talks energy independence but clearly is dead set against the concept. That must be stopped by reasonable people.

3 Dems have attempted to bring the war to a close and with GOP almost succeeded , had not President Doosh put down an override proof set of vetos, some of Doosh's own party are beginning to understand what a mistake and fraud this war has been and to close it as quickly as possible is the most honorable thing to do (leaving only the Afghan commitment).

4. Sen Johny is waaaaaaay too old for this task and besides, hes apparently an ADD sufferer with no ability to focus on issues. That means he too will probably be led around by handlers just like President Doosh.(You reading Bob Woodwards latest ?, fascinating)
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 06:58 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

There could be quite a bit left if the Dems would stop spending it on crap.


Really, they sign the bills?

You seem to be a little confused as to how the process works.

Cycloptichorn
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 07:32 pm
@farmerman,
Hmmm... speaking of bullshit.

farmerman wrote:

McG, youre revisionist **** sometimes becomes a bit obvious

1. The Bridge to nowhere , etc were all parts of the GOP "Pork Congress" that has not shown any measure of reduced spending in the 12 years that the GOP has been in power on Capitol Hill, why not?.


McCain has been against earmarks and it is a centerpiece of his campaign. Say what you want, but it don't change the facts. He will be vetoing a lot of bills I expect. Better hope the Dems win a veto proof majority in congress.

Quote:
2 GOP talks energy independence but clearly is dead set against the concept. That must be stopped by reasonable people.


Bullshit. The Dems are hardly reasonable people.

Quote:
3 Dems have attempted to bring the war to a close and with GOP almost succeeded , had not President Bush put down an override proof set of vetos, some of Bush's own party are beginning to understand what a mistake and fraud this war has been and to close it as quickly as possible is the most honorable thing to do (leaving only the Afghan commitment).


You can be against the war, but it is what it is. Your opinions are meaningless.

Quote:
4. Sen Johny is waaaaaaay too old for this task and besides, hes apparently an ADD sufferer with no ability to focus on issues. That means he too will probably be led around by handlers just like President Bush.(You reading Bob Woodwards latest ?, fascinating)


Too old for what exactly? He focuses on the issues just fine. Obviously you don't like McCain, but that doesn't change the facts that he is a good man, a good politician and will make a good President. Too bad for you and the other haters.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Sep, 2008 07:33 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

There could be quite a bit left if the Dems would stop spending it on crap.


Really, they sign the bills?

You seem to be a little confused as to how the process works.

Cycloptichorn


LOL! Not at all, perhaps you are?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Sep, 2008 06:16 am
Being the doctrinaire party regular that you are McG, Im not surprised at how you seem to reject logic and fact. Im not so bound because issue by issue, I like to analyze the data. The fact is Wheres Johny has been a particular no show in the past 2 years voting record on energy issues. He sort of speaks out several sides of his mouth.

His "No vote" position in funding of drilling for GAS both on and offshore is telling. It means that McCain isnt really interested in SOLVING the energy problem, hes instead, backing the position of the big oil boys .


Im somewhat amused at how McCain has morphed into this "saint" when 2 years ago, his traditional ole guy habit of NV's and voting "present" were beginning to make him a joke especially in the energy field.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Sep, 2008 06:24 am
@farmerman,
I never understood this argument that "McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time", since a President does not actually vote on anything.

I guess you just heard someone say it.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Sep, 2008 06:25 am
@Debra Law,
Debra Law says..."The citizens of Alaska do not pay state taxes. Why shouldn't they exploit THEIR resources and make the oil companies pay most of their bills at the expense of the rest of the nation?"

Because it is their land that we stole from the Natives (via Russia). It is the ONLY reason the US wanted the territory in the first place.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Sep, 2008 06:48 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:

He voted with the Republican causus on Republican issues. Go figure. If had voted against them, he wouldn't make a very good Republican nominee for President now would he?

The only people that actually care about it are those that are going to vote against him anyways.

Yes, he voted with the Republicans. But he is NOT telling the voters he voted with the Republicans. He is telling them he went against the Republicans.

He wouldn't be much of a change agent if he was a Republican replacing a Republican.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Sep, 2008 06:49 am
This is for you Debra Law...

Where Will Our Children Live...

A lonesome warrior stands in fear of what the future brings,
he will never hear the beating drums or the songs his brothers sing.

Our many nations once stood tall and ranged from shore to shore
but most are gone and few remain and the buffalo roam no more.

We shared our food and our land and gave with open hearts,
We wanted peace and love and hope, but all were torn apart.

All this was taken because we did not know what the white man had in store,
They killed our people and raped our lands and the buffalo roam no more.

But those of us who still remain hold our heads up high, and the spirits of
the elders flow through us as if they never died.

Our dreams will live on forever and our nations will be reborn, our bone and
beads and feathers all will be proudly worn.

If you listen close you will hear the drums and songs upon the winds, and in
the distance you will see....the buffalo roam again.

http://www.nativeamericans.com/
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 05/16/2022 at 10:50:44