lil mike
Noob
Karma: +2/-4
 Offline
Posts: 907
 Badges: (View All)  
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2011, 11:20:19 pm » |
|
yeah, why are you believing anything GS is betting on? Haven't they proved to be shitty gamblers who pad their 'pitch' just to make a buck?
I'm no fan of Goldman Sachs. They've manipulated the government to their own ends. But my interest is, as I explained in my reply to Howey, the about-face on domestic and North American energy production. It's both positive news and a positive trend. However you guys seem to have an issue with it, even though it should be something that benefits right and left. Sometimes it's hard to figure you guys out!  |
|
|
|
|
|
Howey
|
|
« Reply #16 on: November 26, 2011, 10:16:55 am » |
|
I'm no fan of Goldman Sachs. They've manipulated the government to their own ends. But my interest is, as I explained in my reply to Howey, the about-face on domestic and North American energy production. It's both positive news and a positive trend. However you guys seem to have an issue with it, even though it should be something that benefits right and left. Sometimes it's hard to figure you guys out! How is there an "about-face on domestic and North American energy production"? Do you mean oil wells, or shale oil exploration rape of prisitine lands as your scam article describes? As long as I remember Republicans have been for destroying America for every little drop of oil, Democrats not. This does not benefit "right and left". As I've already proven, it's a pit bull with lipstick. |
|
|
|
uselesslegs
Noob
Karma: +390/-1
Offline
Posts: 1601
Badges: (View All)  
|
|
« Reply #17 on: November 26, 2011, 01:58:48 pm » |
|
How is there an "about-face on domestic and North American energy production"? Do you mean oil wells, or shale oil exploration rape of prisitine lands as your scam article describes? As long as I remember Republicans have been for destroying America for every little drop of oil, Democrats not.
This does not benefit "right and left". As I've already proven, it's a pit bull with lipstick.
It is a Pit Bull with lipstick. Cut down a few Truffula Trees, what could be the harm? I understand where Mike is coming from though. Getting as far away from dependence on middle east oil, taking their hold on the situation, out of the equation...is very appealing. A few Truffula Trees? Independence? A few Truffula Trees? Independence? But, it's never ends up being...just a few...does it? If we had taken alternative energies seriously, we might need a few less Truffula Trees for that Independence. But we're Americans...we don't do "balance" well. We usually need shit to blow up first, rummage through the pieces, point fingers...then SORTA address things. |
|
|
|
|
|
ekg
|
|
« Reply #18 on: November 26, 2011, 03:44:43 pm » |
|
They hired an ad agency (staffed by Bush/Rove ex-staffers) to spruce up their image after they were bailed out by Bush. Which is nice, since BP hired Goldman Sachs to spruce up their image after the gulf oil spill...  |
Facts are the center. We don’t pretend that certain facts are in dispute to give the appearance of fairness to people who don’t believe them. Balance is irrelevant to me. It doesn’t have anything to do with truth, logic or reality. ~Charlie Skinner (the Newsroom)
|
|
|
|
ekg
|
|
« Reply #19 on: November 26, 2011, 03:48:10 pm » |
|
I'm no fan of Goldman Sachs. They've manipulated the government to their own ends. But my interest is, as I explained in my reply to Howey, the about-face on domestic and North American energy production. It's both positive news and a positive trend. However you guys seem to have an issue with it, even though it should be something that benefits right and left. Sometimes it's hard to figure you guys out! I think it's the 'drill here and now' issue that's the 'catch' I was talking about.. yes, we're all pro-energy independence.. but you want to just kill our resources to get to a non-sustainable energry source.. whereas we, the left, want more sustainable sources without having to destroy the earth to get it.. I really don't know why that's hard for you to figure out, but I really don't know why with a lot of things concerning you(ie the right) |
Facts are the center. We don’t pretend that certain facts are in dispute to give the appearance of fairness to people who don’t believe them. Balance is irrelevant to me. It doesn’t have anything to do with truth, logic or reality. ~Charlie Skinner (the Newsroom)
|
|
|
|
Howey
|
|
« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2011, 04:55:31 pm » |
|
Huh?
Why the facepalm?
|
|
|
|
lil mike
Noob
Karma: +2/-4
Offline
Posts: 907
Badges: (View All)
|
|
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2011, 06:02:58 pm » |
|
How is there an "about-face on domestic and North American energy production"? Do you mean oil wells, or shale oil exploration rape of prisitine lands as your scam article describes? As long as I remember Republicans have been for destroying America for every little drop of oil, Democrats not.
This does not benefit "right and left". As I've already proven, it's a pit bull with lipstick.
Well if you've already proven it! Why didn't you say so? So I can put you down as a no for energy independence if it requires actually using domestic... you know... energy.  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 06:05:34 pm by lil mike »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
lil mike
Noob
Karma: +2/-4
Offline
Posts: 907
Badges: (View All)
|
|
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2011, 06:10:29 pm » |
|
I think it's the 'drill here and now' issue that's the 'catch' I was talking about.. yes, we're all pro-energy independence.. but you want to just kill our resources to get to a non-sustainable energry source.. whereas we, the left, want more sustainable sources without having to destroy the earth to get it..
I really don't know why that's hard for you to figure out, but I really don't know why with a lot of things concerning you(ie the right)
The fact that you are calling it "sustainable" rather than pointing to some particular energy source to save the day, shows that you don't have anything ready for prime time that is sustainable. I don't mind the search for sustainable energy sources, but in the meantime, why oppose something that could provide energy in the short term that's already proven to be practical? |
|
|
|
|
|
betteroffhere
|
|
« Reply #23 on: November 27, 2011, 12:16:50 am » |
|
Huh?
Why the facepalm?
to the sitituation of GS... not your post... also... as a useful image for future need, i would imagine, if you ever see a double face palm forum moment... but i could be wrong... |
|
|
|
|
FooFa
|
|
« Reply #24 on: November 27, 2011, 01:34:41 pm » |
|
Well if you've already proven it! Why didn't you say so?
So I can put you down as a no for energy independence if it requires actually using domestic... you know... energy.
There is a montage of president's back to Ford stating almost verbatim the same words about oil independence. This might make good fodder for bickering but without knowing or acknowledging artificial scarcity, big oil in high places and the vast untapped resources of Alaska besides oil, a full spectrum observation or analysis doesn't exist in a discussion like this. NASA completely disproved the green movements claim of the planet getting hotter. What it is doing is experiencing more extremes and going through a kind of equilibrium. It sent Al Gore further into the stratosphere of bizarroland. The graph that he showed in An ICT was upside down. The space shuttles and rockets do more damage to the atmosphere than the bullshit the green movement scam pushes. |
|
|
|
|
Howey
|
|
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2011, 01:51:32 pm » |
|
There is a montage of president's back to Ford stating almost verbatim the same words about oil independence. This might make good fodder for bickering but without knowing or acknowledging artificial scarcity, big oil in high places and the vast untapped resources of Alaska besides oil, a full spectrum observation or analysis doesn't exist in a discussion like this. NASA completely disproved the green movements claim of the planet getting hotter. What it is doing is experiencing more extremes and going through a kind of equilibrium. It sent Al Gore further into the stratosphere of bizarroland. The graph that he showed in An ICT was upside down. The space shuttles and rockets do more damage to the atmosphere than the bullshit the green movement scam pushes.
The NASA claim has been disproven time and time again. |
|
|
|
|
ekg
|
|
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2011, 02:35:31 pm » |
|
Huh?
Why the facepalm?
it wasn't towards you, it was for the idiots you wrote about.. |
Facts are the center. We don’t pretend that certain facts are in dispute to give the appearance of fairness to people who don’t believe them. Balance is irrelevant to me. It doesn’t have anything to do with truth, logic or reality. ~Charlie Skinner (the Newsroom)
|
|
|
|
ekg
|
|
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2011, 02:44:18 pm » |
|
The fact that you are calling it "sustainable" rather than pointing to some particular energy source to save the day, shows that you don't have anything ready for prime time that is sustainable. I don't mind the search for sustainable energy sources, but in the meantime, why oppose something that could provide energy in the short term that's already proven to be practical?
Oh, ok.. since I don't have anything in the pipe I can't dislike another 'drill here, drill now' project? yeah, I call bullshit on that. The fact that all we do is 'drill here,drill now' and it's all that we'll ever do is why there isn't anything on the horizon. while other countries are moving right along with their plans.. like the dutch and wind http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/25/wind-power-to-make-up-half-of-danish-energy-use-in-2020/but that's something you don't like.. nor do your counter parts since it doesn't equate to 'drill here, drill now'..but maybe if enough people say no to more drilling, then we will start using some of these 'European' concepts.. altho as long as we have rear thinking oil-junkies around and in charge, I doubt it... I mean, the euro's(not the money) only have wallpaper that is 3 times as old as we've been a country.. but ya know their 'foreign' and all.. what is it about the right that they can't just progress... |
Facts are the center. We don’t pretend that certain facts are in dispute to give the appearance of fairness to people who don’t believe them. Balance is irrelevant to me. It doesn’t have anything to do with truth, logic or reality. ~Charlie Skinner (the Newsroom)
|
|
|
|
Howey
|
|
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2011, 02:58:21 pm » |
|
The scam of washing oil out of sand has been tried for over a hundred years and failed every time. The only thing it's accomplished is lots of wasted water and millions of acres of destroyed land.
Time to try something new.
|
|
|
|
uselesslegs
Noob
Karma: +390/-1
Offline
Posts: 1601
Badges: (View All)
|
|
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2011, 05:41:29 pm » |
|
The reason we're grasping at straws, instead of getting serious with alternative energies as an offset (and hopefully eventually our saving grace when the wells literally run dry) is money. Money has ALWAYS been the motivator for stunting any real movements towards progress of REAL independence.
Our economy, how we operate, is built entirely around the functionality that oil provides. There will never be (in this country) a gradual push towards alternatives that offset an ever depleting oil supply. As I've said before, while money has such a stranglehold over every aspect of decision making...we'll wait until the very last second before we HAVE to transition...and it will be ugly, very ugly. It won't be on our watch, but it will be on our children and their grand children's watch. How sad that the few will force so many to live in such a chaotic and frantic environment...for the cash they're making today.
There are times when the common good of the now AND future should be a serious consideration over the profit of the moment. But we don't operate like that. Never have, never will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
