McCain: Oil Rigs ‘Very Successfully’ Survived the Impact of Hurricanes
McCain: Oil Rigs ‘Very Successfully’ Survived the Impact of Hurricanes
Yesterday, Nancy Pfotenhauer, Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) senior policy adviser, claimed that she had been “misinformed” when she falsely stated that Hurricanes Katrina and Rita “did not spill a drop of oil.” Today, McCain made another “misinformed” argument, claiming that oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico “have survived, very successfully, the impacts of hurricanes”:
Q: I’ve been listening to your comments around renewable resources – solar, tide, and wind – you’ve talked a lot about that, but you keep peppering your comments with offshore drilling. But I’m not sure what you think the impact on our environment is based on that.
A: Keep the microphone. I’m aware that off the coast of Louisiana and Texas there are oil rigs, as we well know, and those rigs have survived, very successfully, the impacts of hurricanes – hurricane Katrina as far as Louisiana is concerned.
McCain is wrong. According to press reports, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita “tore through the Gulf of Mexico’s offshore oil and gas fields, toppling production platforms, setting rigs adrift and rupturing pipelines.” The U.S. Minerals Management Service reported that the hurricanes totally destroyed 113 offshore oil platforms.
The hurricanes cost Transocean, the largest offshore driller, “about $135 million in repairs, downtime and equipment upgrades” alone, and damage to offshore producers accounted for 77 percent of the oil industry’s storm costs. One offshore rig, the Ocean Warwick, drifted 66 nautical miles before running aground.
Here are some photos of the success that McCain is touting:
Cross-posted in The Wonk Room.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
When is the right-wing going to learn the difference between a “fact” and a “talking point”?
July 18th, 2008 at 5:44 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
When is the right-wing going to learn the difference between a “fact” and a “talking point”?
This is a trick question right?
July 18th, 2008 at 5:45 pmDamn pictures, anyway! Who ya going to believe? the McDepends BS spin or your eyes.
I am sure they will never see the light of the MSM. Might be damaging to the corporate coffers.
July 18th, 2008 at 5:46 pmYes, RC, there was a touch of sarcasm to my question. But that’s the problem we have. The trolls take the “talking points” to be the equivalent of “facts” that can used to “prove” that they are right and we are wrong. They are not right, of course, but they will argue ’til they’re blue in the face (ironic, isn’t it?) that we, and not them, are the ones living in a fantasy world.
July 18th, 2008 at 5:50 pm.
See, in McBush’s line of work, when “fixing facts” one must repeat them over and over again so that this new truth can sink in. Kind-da catapult the propaganda… *cue applause*
.
July 18th, 2008 at 5:55 pmWayne,
July 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pmYou are so correct. If it was not so sad, it would be funny.
Unfortunately, none of McCain’s lies or his mis-speaks are given much time in the MSM. However, when Obama or a surrogate makes a similar mistake it gets an immediate 72 hour media shelf-life.
July 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pmMcCain will probably come forth with some clarification that he wasn’t really talking about the oil rigs themselves, he was talking about oil spills from the rigs. Then he will repeat the first false talking point.
We’ve done this dance before.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:02 pmYes, audio, video and photos are available, but — and this is the big one — will the media use its files and expose the lies of McCain?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:02 pmDon’t hold your breath.
Well, everyone knows that we have ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia….
July 18th, 2008 at 6:02 pmI would like to make a request. Can all progressives please choose one member of the 23%r’s and teach them how to use the internets? If we can show them how to find their own information, they may move away from the steady stream of lies coming from the WH and the McCain campaign.
If they don’t learn about government and the factual stances of the candidates, at least they can all view the porn.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:05 pmMcCon also insists that we are “winning in Iraq.”
Hence, he is not a member in good standing of the reality-based community. (To say the least.)
July 18th, 2008 at 6:07 pmIf they are not lying they just make sh!t up!
July 18th, 2008 at 6:07 pmThose aren’t damaged oil rigs – they are operationally challenged!
July 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pm#12
ahhh… if only i could direct those in my red area to this website instead of Faux News and World Nut Daily….
we only go to the websites that support our ideology. they do the same thing.
although, i see our local dem party’s website links to thinkprogress.org so it’s a start!! ;-)
July 18th, 2008 at 6:14 pmAccording to McAntediluvian, the dinosaurs “very successfully” survived the asteroid impacts 35 million years ago…
July 18th, 2008 at 6:16 pmBefore blogging took off, I wonder how many lies have been told to me?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:20 pmJim Wilke Says:
Wow, 5 pictures, three of which show the same rig.
How many hundreds of oil rigs are there in the Gulf? How many were undamaged?
why don’t you google it, hotshot?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pmJim Wilke Says:
Wow, 5 pictures, three of which show the same rig.
How many hundreds of oil rigs are there in the Gulf? How many were undamaged?
Read a book. Learn stuff. That’s all it takes.
Jim, please remember that YOU live on this planet too. Your children may want a livable planet to inherit.
Why defend the polluting of our coastline? It is amazing your deference to the GOP is so strong that you would soil your own country just to kiss their asses. Jim, the GOP doesn’t like you, they don’t care about you. They never will.
Just for the record, over 124 instances of spilled oil occured during the Katrina weather.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:25 pmJim Wilke Says:
Wow, 5 pictures, three of which show the same rig.
How many hundreds of oil rigs are there in the Gulf? How many were undamaged?
Google it MORON. 6 undamaged by my count. Only because they were quite a ways outside of the huricanes distructive path.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:26 pmGoL, beat me too it.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:27 pmleftcoast Says:
Unfortunately, none of McCain’s lies or his mis-speaks are given much time in the MSM. However, when Obama or a surrogate makes a similar mistake it gets an immediate 72 hour media shelf-life.
yea, they made him denounce his pastor, preist, his church who weren’t saying nothing but the truth.
while mcviagra is allowed to keep crooks on his payroll.
the msm is racist. they feed into repugs bs, they love it!
July 18th, 2008 at 6:30 pmJim, Are you that BP spokesman?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:33 pmThose rigs look fine to me.
- sarcasm off-
I think we should avoid drilling new wells. The argument to those that want to drill in Alaska and the Gulf, should be that we should keep those reserves in the ground for our future.
The world is obviously facing a dwindling supply of oil and demand is increasing. Why not save those oil reserves for the future, when the need may be even greater.
Additionally, if new drilling is initiated in an attempt to lower the price of gas, aren’t we only postponing an issue that we will one day have to face?
If we successfully lower the price of crude, won’t the conservation, innovation, and energy policy discussions that are happening today, only be postponed?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:34 pmLet’s stop pretending that the facts have any bearing on the third of the electorate that listens to the bologna that the wingnuts spew.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:34 pmRandomChaos Says:
GoL, beat me too it.
;)
July 18th, 2008 at 6:35 pmThe world is obviously facing a dwindling supply of oil and demand is increasing. Why not save those oil reserves for the future, when the need may be even greater.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
RE-PUG!
July 18th, 2008 at 6:40 pmwilke,
way to shoot
down your own
argument, lol!
*
good luck.
#
July 18th, 2008 at 6:41 pmJust more neocon psyops — keep the lie going until it is accepted as fact. I am betting if oil prices keep roller-coastering for the next few months, people who never would have agreed to offshore drilling, will be begging for it. It’s the MSM that keeps propagating these practices by NEVE pointing out the lies.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:48 pmWhy does Jim continually defend the spoiling of our nation? Does he not live here, and so it doesn’t matter to him? Is his soul so blackened by accepting Bush as his Lord and Savior that he can’t feel for the birds and other animals who were permanantly damaged by the spills?
Exactly how bad does the splilling have to be for you to acknowledge it is harmful? If the oil landed on your property, you would be howling for compensation. Hypocrit.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:48 pmI think McShame is suffering from Rig-O-mortis!
Visit The Green Gifting Campaign
http://www.green-gifting.net
~a public service campaign
July 18th, 2008 at 6:49 pmfor earth friendly gift giving~
Wilke,
July 18th, 2008 at 6:50 pmYour use of funny math is confusing me.
How is 163 significantly damaged oil rigs < no significant damage?
Jim. I agree that the damage was not significant.
I also don’t believe that there would be significant environmental damage if we drilled in the Gulf and in Alaska.
But, if we do that, aren’t we just fighting a losing battle?
When you consider the demand from developing countries (China, India, etc), oil is only going to get more and more expensive. Do you really want to compete for it?
An oil based economy with dwindling supply and increasing demand, is looking less rational.
The sooner we commit to alternatives, the sooner we can stop empowering the middle east and provide some leadership to a transition to cleaner alternatives.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:50 pmJim Wilke says “Katrina destroyed 29 platforms and damaged another 29 while Rita destroyed 80 platforms and damaged 28.”
So it’s OK!!! See? Two wrongs DO make a right!!!
July 18th, 2008 at 6:51 pmJim Wilke Says:
163 oil rigs damaged. 3837 unharmed.
OK smart(?) boy.
How many Un-damaged in the direct path?
Exta credit.. How big is the Gulf, and what is the geographic dispertion of rigs?
July 18th, 2008 at 6:52 pmI also don’t believe that there would be significant environmental damage if we drilled in the Gulf and in Alaska.
Psst:
Exxon Valdez…
July 18th, 2008 at 6:53 pmdispersion
There, fixed ;-)
July 18th, 2008 at 6:53 pmJim, 113 destroyed, not just damaged. And it’s not about the ratio of undamaged to damaged or destroyed, it’s about the oil spills.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:54 pmbackup,
July 18th, 2008 at 6:54 pmOMFG… you said something I agree with…
The sooner we commit to alternatives, the sooner we can stop empowering the middle east and provide some leadership to a transition to cleaner alternatives.
These people — Republicans/conservatives/right-wingers/neocons — lie with such abandon. I’m beginning to think that they’re genetically incapable of telling the truth. Or is this some form of ideological or moral Tourette syndrome?!?!? (No offense to those who suffer from the neuropsychiatric tic disorder.)
July 18th, 2008 at 6:55 pmDr. Matt,
July 18th, 2008 at 6:56 pmI have to quit trying to post when I am working. LOL
backup says:
An oil based economy with dwindling supply and increasing demand, is looking less rational.
The sooner we commit to alternatives, the sooner we can stop empowering the middle east and provide some leadership to a transition to cleaner alternatives.
I am beginning to get worried. Today you are making very thoughtful arguments, with good points of view.
The consumers of oil are chasing an ever shrinking supply. In the future, countries will be going to war over this absolutely finite resource. The age of petrolium based energy sources is over; we have to clean up and re-tool for the future discovery of clean evergy.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:57 pmGO see this photo:
http://skytruth.mediatools.org/node/19981
See the huge oil spill, the one that was so big it was visible from space???
10 miles wide and 80 miles long!
So, that’s OK with you conservatives? It’s alright to openly and obviously and blatantly lie to the American People? It’s what Conservatives do, brazenly lie and then call the media biased when the lie is exposed.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:58 pmthe same man that voted for Viagra and against birth control insurance reimbursements.
July 18th, 2008 at 6:59 pm“the same man that voted for Viagra and against birth control insurance reimbursements.”
Obviously, it’s far more important for men to be able to impregnate unwilling women than it is for women to prevent unwanted pregnancies! Duh!
July 18th, 2008 at 7:02 pmIf anyone still thinks the media will report on McCain’s blatant errors – read this:
July 18th, 2008 at 7:04 pmABC News and The Washington Post issued staggered releases of the results of their latest poll, withholding from their first release results favorable to Sen. Barack Obama, including the finding that 50 percent of registered voters would vote for Obama for president versus 42 percent for Sen. John McCain. The next day, the Post ran an article headlined “Poll Finds Voters Split on Candidates’ Iraq-Pullout Positions,” which did not mention Obama’s 8-point lead over McCain. Later that day, ABC News and the Post issued a second release with additional poll results that stated: “Obama continues to hold most of the advantages in the presidential race.”
. . . so, the question is why are we paying “market price” for oil drilled on OUR U.S. leases and processed HERE?
Seems the Iraqis are paying .18 a gallon for their gas, refined and transported by the SAME companies that are charging us $4.49 at the pump here in California . . . .
July 18th, 2008 at 7:05 pmIf we looked at a picture of your head IT would probably appear undamaged but obviously brain damage has occurred.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:10 pmImagine how much force it takes to destroy just one oil platform. Then multiply that force many times over.
Now ask yourself – shouldn’t we be trying to harness that source of energy?
July 18th, 2008 at 7:13 pmIn her return letter she stated that was a good idea and she also liked my idea of transporting as many meth heads from the North West as possible to the gulf states and give them scoops, buckets and a barrel so they could collect the oil spilled by the rigs and sell it on the open market to pay for their meth.
Why waste all that gas? There’s plenty of Methheads in Texas Georgia and Oklahoma to do the job, and it would be a damned-sight cheaper.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:13 pmThat’s about 95% survival rate. That would seem to be a success to me.
Typical right side attitude. I’ll tell you what Jim, lets have the oil land on your property or ruin your fishing grounds, then come tell us just how ’successful’ that was. Sheesh, dude. What is wrong with you? A successful oil spill? Really?
July 18th, 2008 at 7:14 pmYou’re way too charitable StratRat. Jim Wilke and his “ilk” couldn’t get laid in a women’s prison with a fistful of pardons. And you are appealing to the welfare of his children. Obviously all their offspring end up on the basement floor at their mom’s house. Otherwise surely they would have SOME empathy for their fellow man.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:14 pmNow ask yourself – shouldn’t we be trying to harness that source of energy?
Perfectly stated….
July 18th, 2008 at 7:15 pmAnd those weren’t leaking oil they were just containment disabled. Idiot.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:17 pmI know Shayne.
Sometimes I think if I appeal to their parental instincts, they might blow away the cloud of confusion for a short time. It probably doesn’t work with Jim, though. He seems rather selfish and committed to the current occupant of the WH – even to the detriment of his kids. That kool-aid must be strong.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:18 pmAnd the Exxon Valdez was the only one that destroyed that particular shoreline out of how many that passed that way. Right? And the Titanic, well lots of people have survived on other cruise ships so why worry about the ones who died on that one.
Everybody has a right to be ignorant Winkie but you’re abusing the privilege.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:20 pmWilkie is either an employee of the oil or service industry or one sick F’ng puppy.
I vote for both.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:21 pmJim W will say the same thing the next time a nuke plant blows up. “Look at all the nuke plants that haven’t leaked radioactive waste. This is a huge success.”
July 18th, 2008 at 7:24 pmIt’s all relative.
The Republicans say the economy is good and it is. For them.
They say the oil rigs were fine. They looked fine during the flyover.
It’s all relative.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:25 pmThanks, StratRat.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:26 pmWell there’s how many high rises in this country. Heck in just NYC. And only three of them crashed to the ground on 9/11. So what’s the big deal if terrorist fly a few jets into them every now and then, right, Winkydink?
July 18th, 2008 at 7:27 pmIf we commit to change to alternatives now, we could possibly realize these benefits:
De-emphasis on the oil supplies and politics in the middle east.
Ending the wealth transfer of American dollars for foreign oil.
Reducing carbon emissions.
Innovation’s in alternative energy that could be sold to the rest of the world and employment opportunities from new energy industries.
Leadership on new energy sources for the rest of the world vs. condemnation for excessive consumption and emissions.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:28 pmI am trying to get them the hell out of here as I have lost tens of thousands of dollars to them
And it would have nothing to do with the fact that Bush’s economy is in the tank, eh?
Yeah, blame it on the methheads…
July 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pmYou know backup when we want to have an intelligent conversation on renewable energy it won’t be with you or your type because you people are a couple years behind the rest of us. And it probably wouldn’t be too difficult to find place where you badmouthed Al Gore or Jimmy Carter both of who have been saying this for decades.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:30 pmShayne,
July 18th, 2008 at 7:42 pmI’m thinking someone namejacked backup today.
They almost never namejack to make somebody sound more logical. But you never know.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:45 pmShayne. I still disagree with a lot of what Al Gore has to say. I’ve tried to have an open mind on the Global Warming issue, but I still don’t see the apocalyptic climate change.
But, it doesn’t matter. On the issue of energy independence, innovation for new alternative sources of energy and cleaner alternatives; I am in accord with Al Gore.
To me, the disagreements matter less than what I do agree with.
Our dependence on oil is bad for the environment. It’s bad for our economy. And it ultimately jeopardizes security.
I’ve had plenty of critiques of Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. But, on energy, I agree.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:45 pmYeah and now Bush is setting a general timeline in Iraq and negotiating with Iran. You people have caused so much destruction with your own plans that now your stealing all the ideas of Democrats and pretending they’re your own.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:47 pmNot my idea. But at $140 a barrel, increasing world demand and dwindling supply, hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars going to build the middle east and the realization that carbon emissions are at best unpopular and much more likely bad for the planet:
I’m on board.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:53 pmGee, if the republiscums aren’t upset that ONLY 163 oil rigs were damaged out of 3837, why did they get all huffy over only 4 airplanes crashes on 9/11 out of the thousands that fly everyday.
I’ll postulate that someday in the future the truth discovered about this administration will show more damage caused to America’s security, health and well being that 9/11 ever did directly. Its almost as if Osama knew that striking us under Bush’s watch would be like opening cannisters of poison gas in a subway. One would think the Bin Ladens would need an intimate knowledge of Chimpy and his family… oh, wait.
July 18th, 2008 at 7:59 pmbackup Says:
Shayne. I still disagree with a lot of what Al Gore has to say. I’ve tried to have an open mind on the Global Warming issue, but I still don’t see the apocalyptic climate change.
This is the same argument used about Evolution. “Well, it can’t be real or I could see a critter evolving right before my eyes.”
When and if you see apocalyptic climate change, it will be waaaaaay too late. People like you are going to “disagree” right up to the moment the Gulf waters are lapping at your front porch.
The people who do see it are people who can see and understand the available data. Until you become a climatologist, you might want to listen to what they say rather than what you “feel.”
July 18th, 2008 at 8:06 pm.
Jim Wilke,
Why aren’t you clarifying your fuzzy math problem…
How is 163 significantly damaged oil rigs less than no significant damage? You’re asserting an improbable: 2<1
Please parse it for us…
.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:20 pmOff Topic Alert:
Can anyone point me to a list of hateful things uttered by Savage and Limpballs?
I’m trying to educate a program director for the local Clear Channel affiliate.
Thanks in advance!
July 18th, 2008 at 8:30 pmgummitch. If I don’t see the climatic apocalypse, but I agree with the measures that have been recommended to address it (but for other reasons), does it really matter?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:30 pmOff Topic Alert:
Media Matters is the most comprehensive.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:31 pmHumanity, until the (relatively) recent past depended on memory for survival.
Up until 4 or 5 thousand years ago, and the advent of wriiten language, civilization progressed by means of an oral history, and a remembrance of the lessons and skills learned.
In the short span of a few millenia, humans now are bombarded with information, often intentionally false, contrived, and misleading, all to feed a greedy, consumption driven need for instant gratification.
In my short lifetime, I have witnessed an exponentially exploding population, environmental degradation, and a mental and emotional devolution of humans and their cultures. Gone is the respect and appreciation for the diligence and hard work of our ancestors, and the acknowledgment of their errors, in it’s place we are being sold a wanton and gluttonous gimme-gimme, and a future that only extends as long as you are willing to pay for an extended (and empty) warranty.
Anyone with a willingness to see can become aware of the impacts of our activities upon this planet.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:33 pmbackup Says:
gummitch. If I don’t see the climatic apocalypse, but I agree with the measures that have been recommended to address it (but for other reasons), does it really matter?
To whom?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:33 pmI’m so sick of listening to McCain’s lies. Please- someone!!- bring his string of lies to the attention of the general public! CNN, MSNBC, Wash Post, etc. etc,– can’t any of you show what a liar this man is? Who wants this sort of garbage-spewer as president?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:35 pmJim, jim, jim…
I’m refuting YOUR math, not the senile Sentor’s…
#30 Jim Wilke says:
Emphasis mine
IDK, maybe I read you wrong at #25, #33, #58…
163 platforms of varying age were destroyed = successful?
PLEASE PARSE IT FOR US…
.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:40 pmReally dumb question: Things in the ocean are really spread out. Were all the damaged derricks at the center of the strongest part of the storm or were they outside of the maximum forces ?
In other words, if the damaged equipment was away from “ground zero” then it was damaged by forces less than the maximum. Likewise, as Katina changed in intensity rather rapidly, even equipment directly in Katrina’s path, if not hit at the time of maximum intensity, would have been damaged by forces less than the max.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:42 pmgummitch.
If I’m skeptical of the ideology of climate change being used by politicians and beauracrats to promote agendas that have nothing to do with the earth warming, I could focus on that and enter into unproductive debates on the topic.
But, if I agree that the initiatives being suggested are beneficial because they can reduce our dependence on the middle east, promote a cleaner environment, and spur new innovation to create new jobs and new markets; what does it matter if I don’t see it?
Do we focus on what divides us or do we focus on common goals?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:47 pmOFF TOPIC ALERT:
Phil Gramm has resigned from the McCrabby camp.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:48 pmbackup Says:
If I’m skeptical of the ideology of climate change being used by politicians and beauracrats to promote agendas that have nothing to do with the earth warming, I could focus on that and enter into unproductive debates on the topic.
But, if I agree that the initiatives being suggested are beneficial because they can reduce our dependence on the middle east, promote a cleaner environment, and spur new innovation to create new jobs and new markets; what does it matter if I don’t see it?
It doesn’t matter to me at all. If you want to believe that the science behind theories of climate change are an “ideology”, that’s your problem. I do have to wonder at your gall in making judgments about scientific conclusions you’re not equipped to critique. You appear to think you’re being “reasonable” and “thoughtful” but from my perspective you’re operating from your beliefs and are no different from the evolution-deniers in the ID movement.
July 18th, 2008 at 8:58 pmWILKE,
I surmised you were in the oil or oil service industry and now you say you live in Alaska. And I also am confident that you are not in any environmental or fishing industry either. Am I right.
Care to share?
I have been to the North Slope many times and it is NOT pristine in any way shape or form.
A
July 18th, 2008 at 9:04 pmMcCain: Oil Rigs ‘Very Successfully’ Survived the Impact of Hurricanes
Too bad the same couldn’t be said for the poor people there , eh McMoron ?
Not that either you or Chimpy the Wonder Monkey gives a flying shit………..
July 18th, 2008 at 9:08 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
To whom?
gummitch.
If I’m skeptical of the ideology of climate change being used by politicians and beauracrats to promote agendas that have nothing to do with the earth warming, I could focus on that and enter into unproductive debates on the topic.
But, if I agree that the initiatives being suggested are beneficial because they can reduce our dependence on the middle east, promote a cleaner environment, and spur new innovation to create new jobs and new markets; what does it matter if I don’t see it?
Do we focus on what divides us or do we focus on common goals?
July 18th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
You seem to focus on giving kudos to any GOP politician , regardless of whether it’s deserving or not , and are always on the brink of completely distrusting each and every Dem , no matter their sincerity and/or credentials.
Where do you see a “common goal” there ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:11 pmJim Wilke Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal, that wasn’t the question, was it?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
I ask the questions here , shitbag.
BTW
Who the hell are you and why did you decide to stupidly butt in ?
Lemme’ guess ; another GOP backing asswipe ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:13 pmgummitch. fair enough. I don’t consider it gall to critique the scientists. I just recognize them as human as politicians, priests, businessmen, etc.
You could use a similar argument in the runup to the Iraq war; gall in questioning intel and the need to proactively deal with the threat of global terrorism.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pmI’m just finishing Gore’s ‘Assault on Reason’.
Here’s a passage from Gore that has convinced me that the insistence to end debate about climate change is counter-productive:
July 18th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
OMg, the Freepers don’t believe any of this. My god the U.S. is 50% bare;y functioning retarded.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pmMCMetal.
If I can show you some common goals, will you promise to take a deep breath?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
gummitch. fair enough. I don’t consider it gall to critique the scientists. I just recognize them as human as politicians, priests, businessmen, etc.
You could use a similar argument in the runup to the Iraq war; gall in questioning intel and the need to proactively deal with the threat of global terrorism.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Funny , I don’t recall you being anywhere near the questioning phase of this garbage presidency and administration during the 1st 3-4 years of Chimpy’s Idiotic Iraq Invasion ; yet yourself , along with the rest of the mentally challenged 19%’ers , have the temerity to question scientists about a subject manifestly beyond your limited mental capacity and expect to be taken seriously after showing undying adoration and unquestioned devotion to a life-long moron and failure ?
Good luck with that………….
July 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal.
If I can show you some common goals, will you promise to take a deep breath?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
So I can ‘enjoy’ the stench of Wilke’s stupidity ?
I’ll pass………
July 18th, 2008 at 9:23 pmMCMetal.
Here’s a post from #78 above.
backup Says:
——————————————————————————–
If we commit to change to alternatives now, we could possibly realize these benefits:
De-emphasis on the oil supplies and politics in the middle east.
Ending the wealth transfer of American dollars for foreign oil.
Reducing carbon emissions.
Innovation’s in alternative energy that could be sold to the rest of the world and employment opportunities from new energy industries.
Leadership on new energy sources for the rest of the world vs. condemnation for excessive consumption and emissions.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:24 pmbackup Says:
gummitch. fair enough. I don’t consider it gall to critique the scientists. I just recognize them as human as politicians, priests, businessmen, etc.
You’re critiquing the science, which you’re clearly not equipped to do and you’re “critiquing” the scientists by assigning motives to them with no evidence except your own prejudice. You have absolutely no reason to assume that climatologists are making sh!t up except that it supports your own ideology — while trying to project an ideology on them.
You could use a similar argument in the runup to the Iraq war; gall in questioning intel and the need to proactively deal with the threat of global terrorism.
I think I’m marginally better equipped to judge the wisdom of invasion than I am to judge the interpretation of climatological data. I’m definitely better equipped to notice that there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11 and that invading Iraq was a major distraction from the one conflict that was directly connected to an attack on our soil and to know that “terrorism” is a technique, not a movement.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:25 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal.
Here’s a post from #78 above.
backup Says:
——————————————————————————–
If we commit to change to alternatives now, we could possibly realize these benefits:
De-emphasis on the oil supplies and politics in the middle east.
Ending the wealth transfer of American dollars for foreign oil.
Reducing carbon emissions.
Innovation’s in alternative energy that could be sold to the rest of the world and employment opportunities from new energy industries.
Leadership on new energy sources for the rest of the world vs. condemnation for excessive consumption and emissions.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Carter was pushing similar plans/goals 30 years ago ; and guess who those like yourself , similarly stupidly were in favor of ?
Know what , backup , you GOP/Chimpy backers really are mentally ill.
You believe you’re making some sort of point or statement by claiming it is okay to question the findings of a particular scientist or a group of them ; based upon what , exactly ?
Never mind the obviousness of the complete lack of intellect shown in believing in a loser and liar like Chimpy ; let’s not even talk about that.
What exactly , in any of your Chimpy adoring backgrounds , gives you credibility to even remotely intimate you know anything about the field of science ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:29 pmDoesn’t this guy ever get tired of looking like an idiot? Of course it never stopped Bush so I guess that answers my question.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
July 18th, 2008 at 9:29 pmJim Wilke Says:
——————————————————————————–
A very smart man once told me, “You can’t save yourself rich.”
July 18th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
A much smarter man once told me , ” The GOP and their imbecilic backers are the most stupid beings ever crapped out throughout human existence”.
BTW
Thanks for proving my assumption was spot on………..
July 18th, 2008 at 9:32 pmgummitch. I don’t think climatologists are just making stuff up. But, I think it’s possible that an atmosphere exists in which information (or findings) that are consistent with manmade climate change may be favored over those that don’t. I also recognize the possibility that funding may be more attainable for those areas of study that show significant trends as opposed to those that don’t. But, I believe that it is a skepticism that does not preclude supporting cleaner energy alternatives and conservation.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:37 pmThat means oil. We are sitting on oceans of oil that a number of folks, primarily Democrats, want to leave in the ground…….while we continue to bring oil inf rom other countries. The sheer hypocrisy of the issue baffles me.
But not drilling in land specifically set aside by the government for the express purpose of letting the oil companies drill there , and that not occurring , makes perfect sense and isn’t hypocritical at all to you , eh GOP stooge ?
Christ , you’re a moron………….
“We have to preserve the land!”………(but we don’t care what the Saudis do with their land.)
Your retarded simian hero in the Oval Office is buddy-buddy with them , and when he made a request of them concerning your precious oil , they told him to go take a flying fu(k on the moon (and deservedly so) ; does the ignorance and belief that you as an American can tell everyone what they can and should do , that ingrained in your pea brain ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:38 pmMCMetal. Apparently, the only thing more offensive than disagreeing with you; is to agree with you.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:41 pmThat means oil. We are sitting on oceans of oil that a number of folks, primarily Democrats, want to leave in the ground…….while we continue to bring oil inf rom other countries. The sheer hypocrisy of the issue baffles me.
Now, if they really wanted the oil under ANWR, why haven’t they slant-drilled to it, from a less ecologically sensitive area? They have the technology and resources, and I don’t think there are any laws precluding it, so why haven’t they at least tried?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:43 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal. Apparently, the only thing more offensive than disagreeing with you; is to agree with you.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
When that happens , I will clue you in on it……..
You know as much about science and climate change as your retarded simian hero does about splitting an atom ; yet , you find it perfectly acceptable , almost a necessity , to be critical and suspicious of SCIENTISTS and not the garbage political party and POLITICANS (known to lie constantly) that you support without question.
Where above do you see us agreeing ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:44 pmbarfly Says:
——————————————————————————–
That means oil. We are sitting on oceans of oil that a number of folks, primarily Democrats, want to leave in the ground…….while we continue to bring oil inf rom other countries. The sheer hypocrisy of the issue baffles me.
Now, if they really wanted the oil under ANWR, why haven’t they slant-drilled to it, from a less ecologically sensitive area? They have the technology and resources, and I don’t think there are any laws precluding it, so why haven’t they at least tried?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Simple
Much less profit made doing it that way ; and why bother , when your biggest backer is sitting in the Oval Office , making everything as easy as possible for you ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:45 pmActually MCMetal, it was addressed to the “drill at all costs” crowd.
But I agree, they want an easy drill, to maximize profits.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:48 pmWilke,
And you are not in any profession that DIRECTLY benefits from the opening of ANWR? (Politician, service industry, etc.)
And I agree with the diversity of energy sources but to open up entirely new areas when we haven’t explored the area already under lease is ludicrous. And your comparing Alaska (Last I checked was part of the US) to Saudi is ridiculous; we have no say over what they do but the US government does have some control over what is done to the wilderness area of Alaska or any other state when it involves conservation and preservation.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:49 pmIs it because much of this land has already been explored and has found not to contain oil?
Or is it because there is oil there, but perhaps with too high a sulfur content, making refining more expensive, and time consuming?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:51 pmGood question. ANWR is 60 miles from Prudhoe, WAY too far for slant drilling.
So you’re a drilling expert? Where’s your proof?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:52 pmHave you heard the new Motley Crue single: Saints of Los Angeles?
I believe the Crue still rocks for a bunch of old guys.
Your take?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:52 pmbackup Says:
gummitch. I don’t think climatologists are just making stuff up. But, I think it’s possible that an atmosphere exists in which information (or findings) that are consistent with manmade climate change may be favored over those that don’t. I also recognize the possibility that funding may be more attainable for those areas of study that show significant trends as opposed to those that don’t. But, I believe that it is a skepticism that does not preclude supporting cleaner energy alternatives and conservation.
Do you automatically assume that any scientist in any discipline is probably shading the truth just to get funding? Or is your “skepticism” not simply a cover for your prejudices? There likely isn’t a researcher in the world who doesn’t rely on some sort of funding for support. Do you assume they’re all fudging their numbers or do you only make that assumption because you don’t like the conclusions?
“Oh, they’re only human.” Which means they cheat, apparently.
The Leakeys, doing all that work in Africa digging up all those fossils and tracing the evolution of humans . . . someone has to pay for all that research so they’re probably been fudging the numbers just so people continue to support them. In reality, they just found a bunch of funny-looking rocks, right? Do you realize how stupid your assumptions are?
Well, apparently not. You’d rather make the assumption that an entire scientific discipline is interested only in the gravy train, so they manipulate the numbers to keep the big bucks coming in. Never mind that they could make 10 times as much if they manipulated the numbers differently and got their funding from the oil companies.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:53 pmJim Wilke Says:
——————————————————————————–
But not drilling in land specifically set aside by the government for the express purpose of letting the oil companies drill there , and that not occurring , makes perfect sense and isn’t hypocritical at all to you , eh GOP stooge ?
Christ , you’re a moron………….
I’ll ignore the namecalling for now.
Why do Democrats – including Obama – oppose drilling in the northern portion of NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE-A? That tract of land was set aside by Harding in 1923 as a PETROLEUM RESERVE but now the Democrats want to change the status of the area that – surprise! – contains oil.
Why do Democrats – including Obama – oppose drilling in the 1002 lands of ANWR even though the act that created this area in 1980 specifically set this parcel aside for future oil development?
Why do Democrats – specifically Pelosi – keep repeating that there are ‘68 million acres already available for oil development’ without giving us a breakdown? Is it because much of this land has already been explored and has found not to contain oil? Or because other parcels cannot be drilled because of environmental lawsuits are stopping development?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Get that empty coconut out of your stupid ass , and re-read your own moronic post….
You mention Harding and 1980 ; Ronnie Retard’s era.
2 of the WORST AND MOST CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS IN US HISTORY ; and typically , from the GOP.
BTW
I’m simply addressing you properly , shitstain ; like I asked before , who invited you and who the hell are you to question me , skid mark ?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:54 pmC’mon Jim, you were Johnny-on-the-spot with that drilling assertion. Where’s your proof?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:56 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
Where above do you see us agreeing ?
Have you heard the new Motley Crue single: Saints of Los Angeles?
I believe the Crue still rocks for a bunch of old guys.
Your take?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Amateurs of limited ability that got by on gimmicks and looks.
July 18th, 2008 at 9:58 pmWhat’s the matter, Jim? Can’t back it up?
July 18th, 2008 at 9:58 pmJim must be doing the Google.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:00 pmOr, you could just admit you don’t know why slant-drilling hasn’t been tried.
That also is an acceptable answer.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:02 pmgummitch. I’ve got respect for scientists. I concede that some scientists that dismiss climate change are funded by oil companies. Science is the best information that we have.
My skepticism is based on the idea that outcomes can be influenced by motives.
I don’t think you assessment of climate change is wrong. I am probably wrong. But, as open minded as I tried to be, I’m still skeptical. There are huge variables to the Earth, Sun, our atmosphere and man’s role in it.
But, it’s okay. I will continue to try to overcome my skepticism. Until I get it, I will try to support environment friendly initiatives whether they reduce the Earth’s warming or not.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:03 pmMCMetal. I’ll keep trying.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:05 pmMetal man. Jim Wilke seems like a nice guy. The insults and profanity only make you seem less than you probably are.
Let’s take it to a higher level.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:08 pmrepugs can’t keep up with their own lies.
thanks pelosi!
impeach pelosi now
July 18th, 2008 at 10:11 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
Metal man. Jim Wilke seems like a nice guy. The insults and profanity only make you seem less than you probably are.
Let’s take it to a higher level.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
He’s a d0uchebag who butted in when un-asked ; and he is not a “nice guy”.
“Nice guys” aren’t GOP/Chimpy leg humping stooges ……..
July 18th, 2008 at 10:12 pmMCMetal. One more try and then I’m out:
Judas Priest: Defenders of the Faith.
Good ’80s metal album.
And you?
July 18th, 2008 at 10:17 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal. One more try and then I’m out:
Judas Priest: Defenders of the Faith.
Good ’80s metal album.
And you?
July 18th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Anything by them from British Steel up to Screaming for Vengeance ; and every Maiden album up to and including Powerslave…………
July 18th, 2008 at 10:19 pmNice. See ya.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:22 pmbackup Says:
I concede that some scientists that dismiss climate change are funded by oil companies.
SOME?!?!?
Name one that isn’t.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:28 pmJim, Why do you keep lying? You cite the MMS but instead of using their data you make things up.
July 18th, 2008 at 10:47 pmMcCain: New Orleans ‘Very Successfully’ Survived the Impact of Hurricane Katrina»
July 18th, 2008 at 10:48 pmHere’s a couple from the MMS:
July 18th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
and this:
Response and recovery efforts kept the impacts to a minimum with no onshore impacts from these spill events.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:08 pmShorter Jim Wilke: I’m about to take it up the ass, so I’ll just lie back and enjoy the inevitable.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:13 pmWhy do we have to put up with idiots like backup and jim wilke. They should go find a nice men’s room stall and leave us alone.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:15 pmbackup, why do you hate our environment?
Hurricane Katrina Oil Slicks – September 2, 2005
July 18th, 2008 at 11:19 pmLarry Craig is in the stall as well, so they have to take turns.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:19 pmbackup like to look at the world through his Pollyanna glasses. It really rather pathetic.
Step into reality Captain Mantastic, it’s ugly, but at least you’ll be on the level playing field.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:23 pmnon_prophet Says:
This is disgusting. How do the GOP(KKK) defend these lies? The Republicans need to be thrown in jail.
Republicans need to be thrown into an oil slick. If they are lucky, some liberal environmentalists will come along the beach and clean the oil off their sorry asses so they don’t die.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:25 pmI’ll clean ‘em up, but I won’t feed ‘em. That would be socialist, and it would make them sad.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:31 pmThese guys lie everytime their mouths open.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:39 pmIf we throw them into an oil slick, they will have to keep their mouths closed.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:42 pmZooey Says:
backup like to look at the world through his Pollyanna glasses. It really rather pathetic.
Yeah, this guy pisses me off more than the blatant wingnuts. He is a stealth 25% deadender Bushist, who tries to play himself off as a rational moderate, just so he doesn’t get totally destroyed every time he posts.
In truth, he is just another corporatist Republican whore.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:52 pmshoeless,
backup always says he’s “here to learn,” but he takes the short bus to TP, and funds are too short for a note-taker.
July 18th, 2008 at 11:58 pmI like to hear the anti-foreigners-who-have-all-our-oil say things like, “The next time you pull up to the pump to fill up your tank, you’re putting money into the pockets of wealthy Arabs…”
This isn’t quite accurate. By the time you get to pump the gas into your car, the foreigners have already gotten their money for the oil. The pockets YOU are lining are those of the oil companies selling you the gas. The ones making record profits. Off of you.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:28 amI am here to learn. TP sources MMS. I take the time to link to the source and find this (around page 29, check it out):
Although, I don’t support new drilling of U.S. oil reserves or McCain for President, if you believe TP sources there was ‘no onshore impact’ from the spill events.
If the truth upsets you, I get it.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:39 amI’m glad to see that someone realizes that oil was, indeed, spilled because of Katrina and Rita. The point of this discussion is that the right-wing has spent the better part of the past month denying that any spills took place at all. Now they are modifying their message to, “Okay, there were a few spills, but their impact was minor.” The point, that still gets lost on the trolls, is that we know they are lying, and have been from the beginning, because this is what they do. This is what they always do. They lie and try to deceive people into believing things that are not true. It’s the only reason the trolls even show up here. To spread lies. And if they aren’t getting paid for it, I’d hate to be in the room with them when they finally realize the truth.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:46 amYou’ve got pictures of broke down or damaged oil rigs. Good for you.
But, the big picture is this:
I don’t support it, but Republicans and McCain want to open up the Gulf for more drilling. Republicans say its environmentally safe and democrats say that it isn’t.
During Katrina and Rita (two wicked bad storms) there was no significant environmental impact due to drilling. There was land based tanks that failed and significant oil from cars and gas stations in the flooding, but no significant impact from the drilling or the damaged rigs.
If you want to argue that drilling would be a mistake for other reasons, have at it. I’m with you. But, to try to insinuate that drilling is environmentally unsafe as evidenced in the aftermath of Katrina and Rita, is disingenuous.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:51 amWayne. It’s possible this is an example of institutionalized lying. Possible.
It’s also possible that it is an example of partisan hair splitting.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:54 amActually, backup, it’s probable that this is just more right-wing lying. If you understood the history of the conservative movement where message dissemination was concerned, you would know that lying is the technique they have always employed, and they do it for one simple reason: they can get away with it.
You see, when they appear on these talk shows, they are called and treated as “guests”. Now, if you had a “guest” come into your place and start lying his ass off, you would not want to seem impolite to the guest, and calling him a liar to his face would be considered impolite. So you pretend he isn’t lying and try to poke holes in his argument. At this point, if the argument is successfully refuted, the right-wing liar will switch to the age old straw man argument. In this technique, they mis-characterize one of the many left-leaning positions (for we don’t all think alike), then make up shit about what it would mean and try to claim that it’s a ridiculous idea, even though they, technically, were the ones to first bring it up. But they lie and say it’s the left’s position. By then their time for the segment is up and nobody learned anything useful because of the right-wing idiot sent there to lie and confuse the discussion. And by the time you find everything to nail down why they were lying, they come back with, “That’s yesterday’s news. We’ve moved on.”
I see it happen all the time. And we’re on to you guys. Save your time and energy and give up now.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:07 amWayne. If you’re partisan, you probably legitimately see the opposition as lying. (Here’s a secret: the partisan opposition probably legitimately sees your proponents as liars, too).
If you think that one side of the political spectrum has a monopoly on the truth, then I have overestimated you.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:16 amIt’s not that one side has a monopoly on the truth, it’s that the right-wing rarely uses it.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:19 amIn fact, backup, we have been trying desperately to get the right-wing to use facts in their debate, but they refuse. They have an ideology that says shit like “Lowering taxes is always good”, “Democrats are terrible on national security,” and Reagan’s favorite, “You can spend your way out of deficits.” They treat all of these as facts when they are not. And when anyone tries to refute them, they claim that we are the ones not facing reality, when it is the right-wing that has its head buried so far into its own ideology that it wouldn’t recognize the truth if it bit them.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:22 amWe can agree to disagree. But, I think it’s less about lying and more about turning down the rhetoric.
Progressives love the country and have some very good ideas. Believe it or not, conservatives love the country and also have some very good ideas.
Instead of retreating to our opposing camps were we can throw rocks at each other, while the rest of the world passes us by, I believe the time is ripe to actually listen and consider those with different views.
And I think progressives can provide leadership. It’s probably not easy and involves some risk, but, if you believe progressives are better (more evolved) than conservatives, they should be up to the task.
So, instead of a more forceful tit to my already obnoxious tat, why not really create a more reasonable environment. An environment where we deliberate on all the ideas and attempt to form a consensus on the best ones.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:33 amWayne. you’re right about conservatives being blind to anything but their own ideology, but when I talk to conservatives, they say the same of most liberals.
When I talk to conservatives, they honestly think liberals are out to ruin the country. I don’t understand it, but that’s what they think.
And when I talk to progressives, it is a very similar sentiment about conservatives. And both sides think the other is populated with idiots.
The conservatives I talk to seem like intelligent people and the liberals I talk to seem like intelligent people.
The is no conspiracy. No monopoly on truth. No desire to see America fail. And, probably most unbelieveable of all, no monopoly on compassion.
What I believe we have are two competing ideologies. And the generals of each have reasoned the quickest means to victory is to demonize the opponent by all means.
So, we dutifully take our orders and war against those that disagree with us. To the detriment of reason.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:45 ambackup,
From what I have learned, today’s conservative movement had its roots into an anti-FDR ideology. A group of very wealthy people simply hated the idea of their “hard-earned money” (some of them “earned” it by being to parents who had it) being “handed out” to people and felt it was appalling and had to be stopped. The truth was that their motives were entirely selfish – they wanted to keep more of their own, already-enormous wealth. (Even by today’s standards, the amount of millions they had then was staggering.)
So, a few of them got together and decided that they had to persuade the people that they were right and FDR was wrong. They knew it would be tough, especially with all those people getting food, clothing and shelter and not actually dying. But they also recognized that the truth was not going to win them any arguments, so they instead began a strategy of trying to have their viewpoint being given equal weight (in terms of validity, meaning actual connection to reality) with that of, what was then and now thought of as “liberal” view.
One of their misperceptions was that journalism had a “liberal bias”. They remembered the old days when newspapers ran the opinions of the owners, and whatever you said was happening was happening as far as your readers were concerned. It’s not your fault the other papers didn’t know what was happening. They began funding, what we call, Think Tanks. Academic-like sounding “institutions” where position papers would be developed for arguments to present to the media. They were the forerunner of today’s “Talking Points”. And they had a purpose: To make people believe that the things they once thought were true may not have been as true as they thought. And the reason? Because “scholars” had concluded that this wasn’t so. And who was paying these scholars? The same media owners bringing you the story you just heard.
And that’s how they began to fool people into thinking that “journalism” was about “balance”, and that both sides of an argument should be given equal weight and let the viewers/readers decide who is “correct” (assuming the bases of their facts is accurate, which it isn’t always.)
Just because Newt Gingrich goes on Fox News Channel and says something horrible about all liberals and Democrats just because one person (who usually turned out to actually be a Republican, or raised by them) committed some atrocious crime doesn’t make it true. (In fact, the things Newt in particular says actually don’t make a lot of sense when compared to reality. But that’s another ten-paragraph post.) And people think that this is some reasoned, scholarly conclusion, when it’s nothing more than his usual ad hominem attack strategy of demonizing the opposition. But they think it’s true, and they start repeating the false arguments to their co-workers and neighbors. And that’s how people get “mis-informed”.
I’m going to bed, and no one else will read this. So good night, backup. And don’t believe much of what you read and hear in the conservative media. Their purpose is not to deliver the truth, but an ideological spin on events of the day.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:49 amWayne. I read your post. Good nite.
July 19th, 2008 at 4:26 amOk, Well, It looks like McCain is clearly out of touch with reality.Again. Yeah, the answer is in more drilling offshore. Riiiight! Dumbass’s. How some people can support this is beyond me. Cleary the GOP are just pushing this as an opportunity to shovel more cash into the pockets of Big Oil. I think we all are going to have to make some kind of sacrifice here with regards to the topic of energy.ALL oF US. That includes the GOP. The offshore drilling should be an absolute LAST RESORT! We have to make all vehicles comply to fuel efficiency standards for starters, Alternative sources of energy , Not just more drilling, more drilling, more drilling.How stupid can people be?
July 19th, 2008 at 10:07 amBut then again, we’re talkin about GOPers.
backup Says:
Believe it or not, conservatives love the country and also have some very good ideas.
Name one.
Oh, and while you are at it, you never accepted my challenge from #146. Name one scientist who dismisses global warming and is not funded by the fossil fuel industry.
You like to make these vague blanket statements designed to defend the right-wing, but you never provide specifics when called on your lame defense.
This last ditch tactic has become modus operandi in the last few years, as it has become painfully apparent, even to right-wingers, that their ideology and the results of implementing their heinous ideas have become an unmitigated disaster.
It would be easier for you right-wingers, and better for everyone if you would just finally be honest and admit you have been wrong about everything, and commit yourselves to joining with us to correct your awful mistakes.
July 19th, 2008 at 11:30 amWow. You’re all idiots. I don’t like John Mccain either, but at least get YOUR facts straight. He was talking about the way the safety measures put in place on those rigs worked the way they were supposed to and shut off the pumps. Do you see any oil spilling into the ocean in any of those pictures? At least Mccain has at least an idea. Obama’s only solution is “Not Mccain’s.” He says Mccain’s proposal won’t get us oil for 7 years as if that’s an eternity. I plan to still be here in 7 years. Obama’s plan wouldn’t get us any oil ever. He has no plan except “hope” that someone comes up with some magical new form of energy….. Even if someone discovered the end all be all form of fueling cars, how long do you think it would take to perfect the technology, produce the technology, put infrastructure in place to fuel that technology, and make it affordable to the masses? Me thinks a lot longer than seven years. You people are so illogical. You talk about big oil raping us but their profit margins are below most businesses. You talk about how oil rigs destroy the environment… when capped there are positive effects on the environment. Natural seepage leaks 200,000 metric tons of oil into the ocean every year. When capped by an oil rig the amount of seepage drops to about one percent. Seriously guys at least research this stuff a little before you come out with your “I hate republicans” and “Oil is evil.” Let’s have an intelligent talk instead of useless ignoratium.
July 19th, 2008 at 12:28 pmYou are the idiot. The oil doesn’t gush out in a geyser, like the movies. It leaks out below the waterline. Now, do you see any oil spilling into the ocean in this picture?
Hurricane Katrina Oil Slicks – September 2, 2005
backup ignored this satellite photo. I’m sure you will ignore it as well. Idiot.
July 19th, 2008 at 12:37 pmGreat posts Wayne.
July 19th, 2008 at 12:41 pmSure Plastik, we’re the idiots. Typical braindead tool!
July 19th, 2008 at 12:42 pmI grew up in the oil fields of the mid-west. You obviously just believe anything you are told….the cleanup continues here from the boom in the 30’s and 80’s….
speaking of facts and intelligent talk……got anything sensible, logical, factual? Didn’t think so.
I hate republicans and it’s not irrational. They earned it.
July 19th, 2008 at 12:59 pmResearch a little more and you find that the valves and rigs were shut off and functioned the way they were supposed to. The only oil that leaked was the oil that was still left in the pipelines (by the largest estimates 700,000 gallons.) Far less than what would have naturally seeped out throughout the year if those sources weren’t capped. It created was is called an oil sheen, which is what you see in that picture.
As you can see in this picture taken 10 days later…. the oil is almost completely dispersed or evaporated.
As far as fred from the midwest, I thought we were talking about offshore drilling. And also, I think there have been a few advances in technology since the 30’s and 80’s…
And none of you commented about why Obama’s lack of a plan is good.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:39 pmRethuglicans have never understood this technology thing that records speeches and takes pictures that you can go back and see that they lie their asses off and just make stuff up.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:40 pmI’m impressed that a recidivist right-wing lackey like you would even dare to look at the ACTUAL SATELLITE PHOTO OF THE OIL SPILLS.
But, I should have known you would make up some dumba$$ story to cast doubt on the fact of an ACTUAL SATELLITE PHOTO OF THE OIL SPILLS.
Do all you Republican wingnuts just act stupid, or is it genetic?
July 19th, 2008 at 2:03 pmwhy didn’t you respond to my dumba$$ comments if their so retarded?
July 19th, 2008 at 2:05 pmI acknowledged the ACTUAL SATELLITE PHOTO and then found one from ten days later(from the same source as your ACTUAL SATELLITE PHOTO) and explained what happened…
July 19th, 2008 at 2:16 pmJim Wilke Says:
I went fishing in Cordova, Alaska last summer off Hinchinbrook Island. This area of Prince William Sound was essentially Ground Zero of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
There’s not a trace of oil left. Anywhere.
Yes, cleanup efforts were successful, but at great cost. You’re not suggesting the oil just evaporated, are you?
July 19th, 2008 at 2:19 pmHe made a pretty bad point but one good point on that line is that if we drilled domestically then we wouldn’t have to ship oil from the middle east. Exxon Valdez would have never happened. WHOA.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pmI don’t understand why dems are so angry at everyone and everything. They would be so sad if everything was perfect.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pmplastik Says:
He made a pretty bad point but one good point on that line is that if we drilled domestically then we wouldn’t have to ship oil from the middle east. Exxon Valdez would have never happened. WHOA.
It’s a scam. We know drilling companies are booked solid for five years, and that any oil coming from ANWR would take ten years on top of that to get the crude to market. Fifteen years before a drop of ANWR oil reached us.
And there’s no need, as there are hundreds of capped, already-drilled wells, in the US, that they haven’t even touched yet.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:32 pmplastik Says:
They would be so sad if everything was perfect.
With republicans at the helm, that will never be a problem.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:34 pmMaybe it got cleaned up, maybe it evaporated, I don’t know.
Maybe?
C’mon now, don’t play this intellectual rope-a-dope; we both know the cleanup lasted years, and cost hundreds of millions to accomplish. What activists were saying was that left uncleaned, those would be the consequences.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:47 pmWhat i do know is that when it happened, environmentalists said that oil would be visible for hundreds of years, that the damage would never be repaired. That is simply not true. In as little as 4-5 years it was impossible to tell a spill had occurred.
Um, the Valdez spill happened in 1989. If your trip was last year, and you claim the spill only took 4-5 years to clean up,
July 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pmthe math doesn’t add up.
I also believe that ANWR oil would be in your tank inside of 5 years and would already be there if the Democrats hadn’t stalled the issue for over 25 years.
The media has researched, and found that drilling rigs are booked for five solid years. Are new drilling rigs just going to pop up, using pixie dust, or something?
As I said, there are hundreds of already-drilled wells just waiting for extraction, but they can’t get as good of a return on investment, because the capped oil would take additional refining, and they don’t want to spend the money necessary to upgrade their facilities to handle it.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:59 pmBut that’s not the point – environmentalists wanted EXXON thrown out of the state, all tanker traffic stopped because the damage – even with EXXON’s work – would _NEVER_ be ameloriated. That is simply not true.
I think you’re fibbing a little. I remember environmentalists were chiefly concerned with the fact that Exxon, and most other oil companies at the time refused to shoulder the added expense of double-hulling their tankers. They didn’t want Exxon coming back in, with other single-hulled tankers, which is what would have happened if those nasty democrats hadn’t enacted legislation mandating it.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:04 pmDrilling rigs are booked – but bookings change and new rigs are being built.
And there are already-drilled wells, just waiting for extraction – inside the US…
July 19th, 2008 at 3:06 pmWell it’s been fun, Jim, but the day (and the beach) becons me away — so get out, and enjoy the weekend.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:11 pmWinkie gets all his intel directly from the oil companies. They want more leases becaue it makes the value of their stock go up and upper management is then able to take bigger bonuses. Just what they need.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:27 pmThis may be the dumbest troll yet. He thinks the oil on the Valdez was from the Middle East. Use the Googles nimrod.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:28 pmYou can stop shouting Wilke, nobody is listening to your “opinion”. We could all read the oil companies’ propaganda ourselves if we were dumb enough to believe it. This is a progressive site. Why don’t you take yourself someplace where dittoheads hang out and I’m sure they’ll believe all the crap you’re spewing.
You keep listening to Bush or McCain’s opinions over Obama’s. On just about every issues these two a$$clowns realize that Obama was right in the first place and then take on his policy as if is was their own. Are you the last idiot in America to figure this out. Apparently.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:41 pmplastik Says:
Do you agree with dumb as dirt Jim, that the satellite photo of the oil slicks in the Gulf after Katrina “shows something other than oil. Like maybe debris, salt froth, dirt, sediment, just plain old junk.”
July 19th, 2008 at 4:03 pmJust because oil platforms broke and pipelines burst, doesn’t mean oil was spilled. These guys have billions and billions of dollars, and they know how to keep from getting involved in more billion dollar lawsuits for oil spills. They knew the storm was coming, and shutdown the platforms to prevent spillage. So, it IS true, that no oil, or no significant ammounts, were spilled.
July 19th, 2008 at 4:46 pmShayne Says:
You keep listening to Bush or McCain’s opinions over Obama’s. On just about every issues these two a$$clowns realize that Obama was right in the first place and then take on his policy as if is was their own. Are you the last idiot in America to figure this out. Apparently.
No. Fully 25% of the country are the last idiots. And, they will never figure it out.
July 19th, 2008 at 4:49 pmIf these pictures denote a successful survival of offshore oil rigs, I’d hate to see ones that didn’t make it.
Might as well say that FEMA’s response to Hurricane Katrina victims was prompt, too. One lie is as good as another…
July 19th, 2008 at 8:16 pmPlastik:
You talk about how oil rigs destroy the environment… when capped there are positive effects on the environment. Natural seepage leaks 200,000 metric tons of oil into the ocean every year. When capped by an oil rig the amount of seepage drops to about one percent. Seriously guys at least research this stuff a little before you come out with your “I hate republicans” and “Oil is evil.” Let’s have an intelligent talk instead of useless ignoratium.
You obviously don’t spend much time in the Santa Barbara area.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:13 pmYou know, the channel?
Take a walk on any of the beaches there. But be sure to take some paint thinner with you. To Clean your feet. Cause nothing else gets that stuff off.
Try going to Long Beach, and smell the ocean.
Smells like chemicals.
But I think each state has to approve of this. And Calif won’t go for it. Rest assured. We will not go for it.
The first paragraph is a quote from Plastik.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:15 pmThe second is mine in response.
mudsharks buddy Says:
You obviously don’t spend much time in the Santa Barbara area.
You know, the channel?
Take a walk on any of the beaches there. But be sure to take some paint thinner with you. To Clean your feet. Cause nothing else gets that stuff off.
Try going to Long Beach, and smell the ocean.
Smells like chemicals.
But I think each state has to approve of this. And Calif won’t go for it. Rest assured. We will not go for it.
Ever been to the beautiful beaches of southeast Florida? Down there, we don’t even have oil rigs off the coast.
What we do have is a deep channel from the Gulf of Mexico with lots of leaky oil tankers chugging through.
We call the big globs of oil, which we get on our feet when we walk on the beach, “tar babies”.
Welcome to paradise.
July 20th, 2008 at 1:55 amThis is another example that the “old world jounalism of Murrow, Cronkite and Rather is dead and buried. In the case of the Time Magazine reporter Ms Tumulty, she seems to think the finding out the who, what, where, when and how have been replaced with a steno pad, which she records what ABC said in rebuttle to the complaint of Congressman Kucinich. There is a great disconnect with what happened and the points made by ABC. She asks little of no questions to ABC. She takes what is handed to her and repeats it vebatim and then calls that reporting. I call is stenography. Lida Sohbet sohbet sesli chat Gelinlik Modelleri
January 11th, 2009 at 11:53 amIf you’re referring to Karl Schwarz’ articles, if they are true, how will we ever know unless the news media gets involved without bias? The military under orders not to speak out may never convey Karl Scharz’ expose’. Sesli Sohbet If Cheney was truly involved in 9/11 and protected in some way, then he’s being protected by what may be going on in the Caspian Sea area as well. That pre-9/11 August 10, 2000 article drives the point home to me that Cheney had a vested interest in the oil at the Caspian Sea area (before 9/11). Fx15 From all I’ve read in Schwarz’ articles, he claims the Taliban was working on a deal with Argentina with that pipeline in the Caspian Sea area and UNOCOL wanted the deal instead. Orjinal Lida It’s too much to get into here and I’m not able to convey in here what Schwarz has presented in his articles. Sikis Dig into Schwarz’ articles to learn more about the unnamed soldier’s experiences related to so-called Black Ops missions in the Caspian Sea area in Schwarz’ article. What Schwarz had to present in this article is an eye opener: kurtlar vadisi pusu izle
January 30th, 2009 at 2:39 pmThank you very much.
February 3rd, 2009 at 12:26 pmsesli chat
sesli sohbet
sesli chat
sesli sohbet
One offshore rig, the Ocean Warwick, drifted 66 nautical miles before running aground.
February 9th, 2009 at 4:45 pmJust like the cold war when everyone who didn’t agree with the U.S. was either a communist or a communist sympathizer. toki This poor crazy guy spent half a decade being tortured because a bunch
of stupid politicians araç sorgulama were sure the NVA
was in bed with the Russians (minimal help) and/or the Chinese (ancient enemy of the vietnamese). ssk sorgulama You would think he would have learned from others’
mistakes. Guess not. Republicans need an enemy. key ödemeleri This
century it apparently will be all Muslims, kredi all of whom must
be alQaeda operatives.
February 28th, 2009 at 7:51 pmyo nunca habia visto a Eugenio Derbez haciendo el papel de malo pero esta pelicula esta muy bonita y si le cae ambos papeles pero lo disfruto mas cuando hace el papel de comedian
March 12th, 2009 at 9:50 amk?z oyunlar? | araba oyunlar? | flash oyun | oyun sitesi | porno izle
Sesli Sohbet
April 16th, 2009 at 3:07 pmSesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
The Republicriminalssohbet don’t get a pass on this one. They have either liedBedava mp3 indir about conditions on the ground, or, they lied while attacking anyone who has proposed doing exactly what the Idiot in cetChief did today.
April 19th, 2009 at 1:58 pmArsivlik
Film indir
Mp4 Film
Forum
thank you..
April 30th, 2009 at 9:28 am