Pat Dollard | Young Americans

“congressman(woman)” - noun. a member of the United States House of “Representatives” (that means of THE PEOPLE)

(Breitbart)

Pelosi: Bush Drilling Proposal A Hoax Unworthy Of Serious Debate On Gas Prices

WASHINGTON, July 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Speaker Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today in response to remarks by President Bush on energy this morning at the White House:

“The President knows, as his own Administration has stated, that the impact of any new drilling will be insignificant - promising savings of only pennies per gallon many years down the road. Americans know that thanks to the two oilmen in the White House, consumers are now paying $4 a gallon for gas. But what Americans should realize is that what the President is calling for is drilling as close as three miles off of America’s pristine beaches and in other protected areas.

“The President has failed in his economic policy, and now he wants to say, ‘but for drilling in protected areas offshore, our economy would be thriving and the price of gas would be lower.’ That hoax is unworthy of the serious debate we must have to relieve the pain of consumers at the pump and to promote energy independence.

“Today, the New Direction Congress will vote on legislation to bring down gas prices by taking crucial steps to curb excessive speculation in the energy futures market. The President himself could lower prices by drawing down a small portion of our government oil stockpile, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The New Direction Congress will continue to bring forth responsible proposals to increase supply, reduce prices, protect consumers, and transition America to a clean, renewable energy independent future.”

SOURCE Office of the Speaker of the House

***Background:

*** Clueless Lying CUNT ALERT***:

69% Support Offshore Drilling: Poll finds most people think drilling for oil and natural gas off the nation’s coast lines is a good idea.

By Ben Rooney, CNNMoney

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — As the nation struggles to meet its energy needs, a majority of Americans think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas is a good idea, according to according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Wednesday.

The poll, which surveyed more than 500 adults by phone in July, found that 69% of respondents support the idea of offshore drilling, while 30% opposed it. In June, 73% were in favor of offshore drilling.

But the poll also found that Americans are divided over whether or not offshore drilling will have an immediate impact on high gas prices.

When asked if increased offshore drilling would reduce gas prices in the next year, only 51% of a separate sampling of 500 Americans believed it would, while 49% did not.

The debate over offshore drilling has become an increasingly important political issue in the era of $4 a gallon gas.

President Bush on Wednesday called on Congress to allow offshore oil drilling, citing an “urgent” need to reduce pressure on crude and gas prices.

Supporters of offshore drilling, including President Bush, say it will help the country break its dependence on foreign imports and shield the U.S. economy from volatility in the global oil market.

The bans prohibiting offshore drilling, which were put in place decades ago, are outdated and should be lifted, proponents say.

But opponents argue that more drilling offshore could damage sensitive ecosystems.

“There’s a reason why those bans and moratoria were put in place,” said Matt McClain, director of communications for the environmental group Surfrider Foundation. “And those risks are always there.”

McClain says increased offshore drilling would “provide questionable results.” He points out that the nation’s coasts are not just recreational areas but are important “economic engines,” especially in California and Florida where tourism is a key driver of economic activity.

What’s more, the nation imports the bulk of its oil from Canada and Mexico - complicating the energy independence argument, McClain says.

Still, the nation’s economy will continue to rely on fossil fuels for the foreseeable future, according to Sara Banaszak, senior economist at the American Petroleum Institute.

“Under any model of the country’s energy future, we will still need more oil and gas over next 20 years,” she said. Offshore drilling can help meet that need and will boost domestic economic activity.

Banaszak says opening up the country’s coast lines to oil exploration has the potential to have “immediate impact,” on gas prices.

Lifting the ban would send a “strong signal” to the oil futures market, which could help bring the price of crude down immediately, she said.

But it is difficult to say how much oil and natural gas may be brought to the market as a result of offshore drilling.

“We haven’t been able to do any research in the moratoria areas for 20 or 30 years,” Banaszak said.

In some cases, like in Florida where some offshore infrastructure already exists, installations could be brought online in 2 to 3 years, Banaszak said.

In most cases, however, it would take up to 15 years to access offshore oil, depending on how far the source is from shore and how deep below the surface it is.

——————————————————————————————-
Foreign Oil Causes Spills …

By Humberto Fontova - (WND)

“An oil spill that closed a long stretch of the lower Mississippi River on Wednesday undercut his (McCain’s) message that offshore drilling was desirable and safe.” Elizabeth Bumiller, New York Times, July 25.

“In selling his absurd coastline drilling plan to the American people, ” said Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez last week, “McCain has time and again pointed to advanced technology that would supposedly eliminate the threat of massive oil spills. … Having to cancel your big oil drilling photo op (in Louisiana last week) because of a massive oil spill is like canceling a crime safety photo op because the house next door just got robbed. Look up ‘irony’ in the dictionary and you will find a description of this turn of events.”

Look up “idiocy” in the dictionary and you will find Menendez’s comment. Look up “jackass” and you should find the faces of all the eminent journalists quoted above from the pages of America’s most eminent journals.

This writer, by the way, could smell the oil fumes from the spill from his porch. In fact, this spill hammers home the case for the Republican (and minority Democratic) case for offshore oil drilling as loudly and tightly as those prices at the pump.

If the first part of any of the above premises (that an oil tanker was involved) had been true, then the senator’s and eminent journalists’ deductions would have surpassed in stupidity even the ones they deducted and broadcast.

In fact, the 419,000 gallons that spilled into the Mississippi river on July 23 consisted of fuel oil (not crude oil) from a barge that picked it up from a local fuel merchant. As it happened, this fuel oil-laden barge collided with a tanker, the Tintomara, but this tanker was also not carrying crude oil. It transported styrene and biodiesel. But the Tintomara has carried (foreign) crude oil in the past and could easily carry (foreign) crude oil in the future.

The Mississippi River below and above New Orleans typically carries a heavy traffic of tankers transporting (foreign) crude oil to refineries in this area. And accidents occur. So here, I’ll help you senatorial and media greenies establish the premise your sloppy research and wishful thinking caused you to botch on this spill. Here ya go … softly and right over home plate:

“An oil tanker, the Westchester, lost power and ran aground 40 miles south of New Orleans, spilling more than half a million gallons of (foreign) crude oil into the Mississippi River. The spill was the largest in U.S. waters since the Exxon Valdez disaster in March 1989.” New Orleans Times Picayune, Nov 29, 2000.

So here’s a bona-fide oil tanker, carrying bona-fide oil and causing a bona-fide oil spill, as you eminent journalists concocted last week. Well, this type of spill is the very thing that more domestic oil drilling will prevent. The transportation of foreign oil to American refineries by tankers – not the production of domestic oil, which is transported to refineries via pipeline – causes most oil spills.

Fashionable Florida, for instance, zealously prohibits offshore oil drilling but had its gorgeous “Emerald Coast” panhandle beaches soiled by an ugly oil spill in 1976. This spill, as almost all oil spills, resulted from the transportation of oil – not from the extraction of oil.

Assuming such as Hugo Chavez deign to keep selling us oil, we’ll need increasingly more and we’ll need to keep transporting it stateside – typically to refineries in Louisiana and Texas. This path will continue to take most of those tankers (as the one in 1976, and the one in 2000) smack in front of Florida’s panhandle beaches and up the Mississippi River, past the scenic New Orleans Riverwalk. Recall the Valdez, the Cadiz, the Argo Merchant. These were all tanker spills. The production of oil is relatively clean and safe. Again, it’s the transportation that presents the greatest risk.

Sen. Mc Cain’s (belated) support for domestic oil exploration and production would thus help prevent such accidents as the Westchester’s and the one fabricated by a wishful mainstream media and Sen. Menendez about the Tintomara.

(h/t Babalu)

“Simple Answers” From A Simple Mind

Speaking “Truth To Shit-Heads”

I doubt you’ll be needing any of my F-bomb laced rant added to any of this post …

Thank yunz.