CNN: Palin’s suggested oil export ban ‘not exactly easy to understand.’
CNN: Palin’s suggested oil export ban ‘not exactly easy to understand.’
This afternoon on CNN, host Wolf Blitzer showed video from last night’s townhall with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), in which Palin — whom McCain said “knows more about energy than…anyone else in the United States” — was asked how she would keep oil from new domestic drilling in the U.S. market. In a serious understatement, Blitzer called her answer “not exactly easy to understand.” Watch it:
As the law stands now, expanded domestic drilling would have no impact on U.S. gas prices precisely because “oil is a global commodity whose price is set by global supply and demand.” Is Palin calling for a total export ban?
“Oil and coal? Of course, it’s a fungible commodity and they don’t flag, you know, the molecules, where it’s going and where it’s not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first,” Palin said. “So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it’s Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It’s got to flow into our domestic markets first.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
79 Responses to “CNN: Palin’s suggested oil export ban ‘not exactly easy to understand.’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Zooey Says:
Is she speaking English?
Sort of. Its that obscure Republican dialect called double-speak.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:34 pmWayne Says:
How did my reply to Zooey end up at the first post?
TP, you need to have your server checked, seriously…..
September 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
You're a time traveler, Wayne!! I'm gonna start calling you Doctor Who. ;)
September 18th, 2008 at 5:41 pmJim Wolf359 Says:
Will someone please be so kind as to explain to me why the polls show such a close election between Obama and McCain at this point? For the life of me I don’t understand why Obamam is not CRUSHING him at this point.
Because half the people polled are low information
September 18th, 2008 at 5:42 pmvotersIDIOTSThere is no "clean coal," even though one of St. Barry's more prominent beneficiaries would like you to believe there were.
At best, it will require GOPhuqing up billions of gallons of fresh water. It is at best an energy wet dream.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:43 pmOh, how bizarre. My response to Wayne is now #2.
Spooky!
September 18th, 2008 at 5:44 pmRead the transcript of Palin’s response here:
In fact, is a non-response
September 18th, 2008 at 5:47 pmJim Wolf359 Says: Will someone please be so kind as to explain to me why the polls show such a close election between Obama and McCain at this point? For the life of me I don’t understand why Obamam is not CRUSHING him at this point.
Ummmm, mainly because Obama's a (negro), if you know what i mean...
September 18th, 2008 at 5:48 pmWell she IS the GOP expert on the subject.... DUH.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:51 pmWhen do we get to see a Palin response that isn't just semi-random boilerplate?
Let me guess, December?
September 18th, 2008 at 5:51 pm"Is Palin calling for a total export ban?"
If she is, she got her last $heckel from the Oil Industry last week...
September 18th, 2008 at 5:52 pmObviously the two of them have firmly demonstrated their absolute lack of even the most minuscule understanding of energy - McCain by saying she has more understanding than anyone else in the country (could be true if everyone was a Republican), and Palin for saying such nonsensical trash. McCain's response about Spain was just about on the same level!
September 18th, 2008 at 5:54 pmPalin’s suggested oil export ban ‘not exactly easy to understand.’
- -Experts are elitists and therefore they need not explain themselves.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:55 pmWTF? Now we know why she is not allowed to speak. Popping popcorn for the VP debates. All Biden has to do is just answer his questions. She just freaking babbles to hear herself talk. She is INCOHERENT. She will make Admiral Stockdale, bless his heart, fade into history.
LMAO at Leftside Annie's post.
September 18th, 2008 at 5:56 pm“Oil and coal? Of course, it’s a fungible commodity and they don’t flag, you know, the molecules, where it’s going and where it’s not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first,” Palin said. “So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it’s Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It’s got to flow into our domestic markets first.”
Is she speaking English?
September 18th, 2008 at 5:56 pmThat makes as much sense as calling the Exxon Valdez spill 11,000 gallons of fuel, when it was 10.8 million gallons of crude covering 11,000 square miles of ocean.
Where's her oil energy expert crown?
September 18th, 2008 at 5:59 pmOMFG!!! THIS is the person McSame claims "knows more about energy" than anybody else???? This is the least of McCain-Palin things we find "difficult to explain" . . .
Shall we focus on the stupidity of McCain's mental process that resulted in selecting a mini-mind, incompetent, power abusing lier based on the pure political choice of ta-tas and anti-choice fundamentalist disguised as a "politician" over the need to find a person able to LEAD us into the NEXT Century rather than re-visit the Middle Ages.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:00 pmIt would be nice if Govenor Palin would present evidence that ALL the crude oil produced in the State of Alaska stayed SOLELY in the American market. If this is not true and she knowlingly lets the oil companies export almost all of the oil to Japan then she should immediately resign her job as Governor and admit her hyprocracy. I'll never live long enough to see it or get a gallon of Alaska gas for my car. Even if we do go back to Japan we will ride the train and not rent a car.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:00 pmComment #10
Please no comment about my spelling. I can spell Govenor as well as she can be one. With about the same qualifications.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:03 pmLeadership is not a fungible commodity, that is units aren't like each other, except in the case of Bush/Cheney/McCain/Palin. Now where's that fungicide?
September 18th, 2008 at 6:03 pmGive it up, backup. When you post an NRO opinion piece as an off-topic comment and then admit that the premise of the piece is flawed, you don't get to ask follow-up questions in a desperate attempt to extend the relevance of your initial failed post.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:04 pmHard to understand? Psychobabble is all it is, and she doesn't have a clue. I guess this is Palin "thinking on her feet." I suppose what she's trying to say is that we shouldn't export oil and coal until our own needs are met...excuse me? We only produce 3% of the oil in the world, but use 25% of the world's production. So it wouldn't even matter if we refused to export a single drop! We could never meet our oil needs. As for coal, I'm not sure of the totals we use in world production, but it is the worst, dirtiest energy source on the planet. And technology for "clean coal" is not significantly developed or widespread.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:06 pmAlso, 'not exactly easy to understand' positions from the VP candidate:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/president/28596729.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUI
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/10/opinion/main4435937.shtml
September 18th, 2008 at 6:07 pmHow did my reply to Zooey end up at the first post?
September 18th, 2008 at 6:08 pmTP, you need to have your server checked, seriously.....
EugeneDebs. correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Obama and Biden both supported the bridge to nowhere. not just that they opposed sending the money to katrina victims, but actually supported the funding in the first place.
http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/
September 18th, 2008 at 6:09 pmWill someone please be so kind as to explain to me why the polls show such a close election between Obama and McCain at this point? For the life of me I don't understand why Obamam is not CRUSHING him at this point.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:09 pmIf a picture's worth a thousand words, two pictures are worth a good laugh.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:10 pmbackup Says:
Obama and Biden’s moaning about all of this would be far easier to stomach if they, too, opposed the Bridge to Nowhere. Not so.
The problem is McCain opposed it, then Palin has lied about it and keeps lying about it.
But you do like supporting liars, don't you.
Seriously you are sounding more idiotic day by day, dude.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:11 pmSarah Palin is an expert on Bullshit. 50% of the worlds bullshit comes from her mouth.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:12 pmBecause idiots like the guy who posted #16 also get to vote.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:13 pmIt's just because we don't know how to speak "beauty queen". Just ask Miss South Carolina and other "US Americans."
September 18th, 2008 at 6:13 pmBecause idiots like the guy who posted #16 also get to vote. Hmm now it's 17 :)
September 18th, 2008 at 6:14 pmUm... two things you're missing with this quote here, backup:
one, it's not about the "bridge to Nowhere". It's about LYING ABOUT the "Bridge to Nowhere".
two, the Obama Biden campaign has not made earmark reform a position of theirs. That's the other guys.
and three, it's pretty far off-topic.
okay, three things you're missing.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:17 pmthis board is wacky today. posts keep moving.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:18 pmTP is having a Wordpress problem. We had this happen at the Zoo last year. It made for some interesting threads!
September 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pmThere is NO SUCH THING as "clean coal," though one of Obama's most generous beneficiaries induced him to say he though there was, in Kentucky, amazingly.
At best, it is immensely wasteful of fresh water to 'clean up' coal. But it keeps the extant power structure in tact, so it's a GOPhuque wet dream...
September 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pmbackup,
the national review online?
"If you’re not concerned about credibility - have at it."
*
*
September 18th, 2008 at 6:21 pmYeah there are two people now who are wondering why I called them out.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pmWayne.
You're right. My apologies (sincere).
I'll think about it, and at the least, come back when it's a more appropriate thread.
see ya.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:22 pmwow, this is wierd...
September 18th, 2008 at 6:24 pmi just replied to a message that hadn't been written yet...
Sarah sez:
"I personally believe the U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some, uh...people out there in our nation don't have oil, and, uh, I believe that our oil drilling like such as South Africa and, uh, the Iraq everywhere like, such as and...I believe that they should, our oil drilling over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., err, uh, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future for our..."
September 18th, 2008 at 6:24 pmof course backup
if you'd like to chat
about the national review
there is this article you
might find interesting.
enjoy.
*
good luck.
#
September 18th, 2008 at 6:26 pmCrusty Old Bastard
September 18th, 2008 at 6:29 pmI have never been polled amd I am registered as a "PND"
(party not declaired).
Uh, why did the idea of exporting US oil even come up? Isn't the idea to make the US more energy self sufficient,resulting on less dependence on imported oil? The price of oil within the US will probably not go down but go up. It won't be cheap to drill here in the US compared to the Middle East.
Isn't it more important to assess just how much of oil there is within the US anyway?
Also as an option, why not consider extracting oil from the massive oil tar fields in Canada (also in Venezuela). It is getting economically feasible given the cost of oil. Oh wait, China has dibs on some of it already!
September 18th, 2008 at 6:29 pmwait, wait backup
here's a fun one for
you to sort out.
:)
a palin/mccain administration?
#
good luck.
^
September 18th, 2008 at 6:31 pmtokin librul Says:
wow, this is wierd…
i just replied to a message that hadn’t been written yet…
Monday it was the stock market, today its the Time Continuum. LOL
September 18th, 2008 at 6:31 pmBeeps-when-backing up Says:
Also, ‘not exactly easy to understand’ positions from the VP candidate:
Obama and Biden had an excellent opportunity to do the right thing. Just seven weeks after Hurricane Katrina, Senator Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) proposed to transfer $125 million from the notorious Bridge’s budget and instead devote it to rebuilding the Interstate 10 Twin Spans Bridge between New Orleans and St. Tammany’s Parish. The storm chopped up the bridge.
OK - do you know why they voted against the money for the Twin Span? The bids had not come back yet - and rather than just throw money around - unaccounted - they were part of the cadre that requested that the money (which eventually did come through later) not be mispent at that point.
They weren't defeating the Twin Span funding - they were judiciously making use of their votes to properly fund a project.
Put things in context, backup, and remember to tell the whole story. Oops, guess you just aren't capable of that, eh?
Typical.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:32 pmOh, I must disagree, satirev.
I think Governor Palin's response showed an incredible wealth of creative thought. It's not easy to come up with a whole paragraph of crapola with enough words tied vaguely to a subject about which you know nothing.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:36 pmralph. you're right about the issue of misrepresenting the position on Palin's part, the fact that it's not the Obama/Biden platform, and that I'm off topic.
But, does it make any sense for Biden to lament McCain's economic answers as the 'ultimate bridge to nowhere', if he supported the bridge to nowhere?
Does that mean he supports McCain's economic answers? Or he was wrong about his support of the bridge to nowhere?
September 18th, 2008 at 6:37 pmWell, clearly Palin is the nation's, if not the world's, expert on energy. After all, she did use the word "fungible".
And as such an expert, I'd like to see her in a debate with, oh, let's just say, AL GORE.
Granted, he is probably an energy neophyte by comparison, but it might make for an interesting exchange.
Throw in a few professors from MIT just for grins and giggles!
PEACE
September 18th, 2008 at 6:40 pmJim Wolf359 Says: "Will someone please be so kind as to explain to me why the polls show such a close election between Obama and McCain at this point? For the life of me I don’t understand why Obama is not CRUSHING him at this point."
Jim,
According to my irrefutable source (Granny) they only poll Republicans with land line phones--no cell phones, no Democrats or others. Ergo McInsanities and McInpantities have 45% of 40% of the registered voters or 18% of the total vote so the TRUE vote is Obama--82%, McLosers--18%. Now that IS crushing.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:40 pmbackup Says:
September 18th, 2008 at 6:40 pmCan you read? He didnt support the bridge to nowhere he opposed bill for other reasons. Try to keep up
My GOD she is stupid.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:44 pmjoe. Okay. she put palin in front of mccain. It's a gaffe. But, is it any worse than the man that would be only a heartbeat away, telling a man in a wheelchair to stand up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2mzbuRgnI4
Those miracles might be better left to the messiah.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:44 pmThis just in from Captain Obvious:
backup is being obtuse again.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:45 pmIn Re #57:
My comment, as usual, is more comedy than context but on a serious note I am sure that the regulars here at TP represent a true cross-section of the Liberal/independent (no initial capital (I coundn't resist: no residual capital either after the Wall Street debacle))/Democrat population but no one has ever admitted or claimed to have been polled. I have not been nor do I know of anyone who has. Any rebuttal?
September 18th, 2008 at 6:46 pmbackup Says:
You just cannot get the idea that the issue with the "bridge to nowhere" is not a topic in itself, but Palin's and McCains lies about it are.
Its the the flip-flops, the dishonesty, the lies, the damn lies and the goddamned lies, stupid.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:46 pmbackup Says:
joe. Okay. she put palin in front of mccain. It’s a gaffe. But, is it any worse than the man that would be only a heartbeat away, telling a man in a wheelchair to stand up:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Quick look over there, or there, or ANYWHERE at some Democrat SOMEWHERE, anywhere but at Palins abject stupidity. That is pretty much STANDARD trollwork
September 18th, 2008 at 6:52 pmZooey Says:
This just in from Captain Obvious:
backup is being obtuse again.
Again?
**Lets see where the time slip sends this post, LOL
September 18th, 2008 at 6:54 pmThis looks like it's from an official Obama sight. They say they want to 'shine light on earmarks and pork barrel spending':
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/
If it's true, then it sounds as if they are making earmark reform part of their platform.
Their support for the 'bridge to nowhere' then becomes relevant.
September 18th, 2008 at 6:54 pmFor anyone here who follows fivethirtyeight, here's the latest!
A must see:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
The tide has turned, and turned in a HUGE wave!
PEACE
September 18th, 2008 at 7:01 pmEugeneDebs. If Palin was at a campaign event and asked a man in a wheelchair to stand, the press (and progressives) would be having a field day. The message would be that she's obviously not ready for prime time. The Biden comment went unnoticed.
And, to be honest, Palin held her own with Charlie Gibson, especially when you consider the examination she got vs. the 'scrutiny' that Charlie gave Obama. Check it out:
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=29535
September 18th, 2008 at 7:03 pmBackup, I may have to start flagging you.
Sometimes you do show some signs of intelligence in your discussions, but today is not one of those days. Today you are just being an annoying troll.
Your off subject strawmen and projections are getting a bit irritating.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:03 pmWayne.
You’re right. My apologies (sincere).
I’ll think about it, and at the least, come back when it’s a more appropriate thread.
see you.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:05 pmbackup Says:
EugeneDebs. correct me if I’m wrong,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Their votes were for an OMNIBUS SPENDING BILL. Bills are complicated things. Would you have them deny the funding for the several billion dollars of WORTHWHILE projects just to stop the silly bridge? Its just dumb to pretend that a vote on a bill is the end all of whether they support or oppose everything IN the bill. IF the bill had been ONLY about the bridge you would have a point. It wasnt there was also a flaw in the Coburn amendment so THAT also doesnt mean they were supporters of the bridge. Think of it like this. Suppose you SUPPORTED a Medicare drug benifit but DIDNT like the fact it had a 139 BILLION dollar subsidy to the Pharmacuetical industry. So if you vote FOR the bill because you want the benifit does that mean you SUPPORTED the subsidy? If you voted against the bill because of the subsidy does that mean you OPPOSE a drug benfit? It is usually a mistake to oversimplify these things but to just CLAIM that the vote means they supported the bridge is unsupportable unless you can cough up a quote of them ACTUALLY SAYING THEY SUPPORT IT or if the bill had been ONLY about it.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:11 pmEugeneDebs. good point. thank you.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:15 pmbackup Says:
EugeneDebs. If Palin was at a campaign event and asked a man in a wheelchair to stand, the press (and progressives) would be having a field day. The message would be that she’s obviously not ready for prime time. The Biden comment went unnoticed.
And, to be honest, Palin held her own with Charlie Gibson, especially when you consider the examination she got vs. the ’scrutiny’ that Charlie gave Obama. Check it out:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First no she didnt she came off as vapid and uninformed. Second please give up trying to pretend Biden and Obama are getting a pass from the press while McSilly and Paladin are under a microscope. She is getting bad press now for two reasons she is ducking the press, except for softball interviews and she keeps lying and making idiotic statements. Biden is a smart man who is PRONE to idiotic foot in mouth moments one of them pretty much ended his Presidential campain as soon as it started. None of this IS THE TOPIC. You keep doing this LOOK over there at some democrat somewhere derailing of the thread. THESE threads have topics and its plain trollwork to try the look over there at the Democrat tactic. HAD this been a POLICY issue instead of run of the mill stupidity that would be one thing. It isnt, you have no point
September 18th, 2008 at 7:18 pmNot "clumsy" but "clueless".
September 18th, 2008 at 7:21 pm"If it’s true, then it sounds as if they are making earmark reform part of their platform."
No. Government transparency is the aim but I'm sure they are open to cutting some pork barrel projects.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:22 pmbackup Says:
And, to be honest, Palin held her own with Charlie Gibson, especially when you consider the examination she got vs. the ’scrutiny’ that Charlie gave Obama.
*
hmmm,
bill o'reilly's interview with oabama
vs.
sean hannity's interview with palin.
#
"Check it out"
here and here.
!
“If you’re not concerned about credibility - have at it.”
#
September 18th, 2008 at 7:22 pmSimple version: Earmarks are added to Bills. They are not the Bills themselves.
September 18th, 2008 at 7:23 pmbackup, are you mendacious, or stupid?
The quote you pulled from "an official Obama sight (sic)" proposes greater transparency of earmarks, not a widescale elimination of them, as McSame and Caribou Barbie propose.
But the overarching poit here:
IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BRIDGE. IT'S ABOUT THE LYING ABOUT THE BRIDGE.
Why can you not get that?
September 18th, 2008 at 7:35 pmAnd for the curious, The First Law of Internet Posting states that: Anyone who criticizes another's typing/editing skills, will invariably make a similar mistake in their original critique.
It's inevitible.
[Ok, that one was on purpose]
September 18th, 2008 at 7:40 pmhttp://www.americablog.com/2008/09/palin-puts-herself-on-top-of-ticket-its.html
palin/mccain 08
September 18th, 2008 at 7:45 pmbackup Says:
joe. Okay. she put palin in front of mccain. It’s a gaffe. But, is it any worse than the man that would be only a heartbeat away, telling a man in a wheelchair to stand up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2mzbuRgnI4
Those miracles might be better left to the messiah.
*
you better look at your own link.
he didn't tell a man in a wheelchair to stand up.
ha asked him to because he wanted to honor a
man who had served his country.
*
it was an honest mistake not a freudian slip.
however you put it in the context of a man who's just
a heartbeat away from the presidency and insinuate that
that he's deliberately being blasphemous - well backup
that's just sick concentration camp guard humor on your part.
*
i know you don't have conscience but
if you did i'm sure it would being bothering
you now and you'd apologize.
*
thank you.
#
September 18th, 2008 at 8:08 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
IT’S NOT ABOUT THE BRIDGE. IT’S ABOUT THE LYING ABOUT THE BRIDGE.
Why can you not get that?
*
because he's a troll ralph.
underhanded, lying and completely
rovian in his manner and character.
^
September 18th, 2008 at 8:10 pmSo what her answer seems to imply (and what we've known all along) is that a good portion of the oil we pump out of the ground here in good ol' America, to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, will indeed be sold on the open market.
What pisses me off is that no one in the MSM seems to be interested in pounding the "Drill Drill Drill" crowd over this.
September 18th, 2008 at 8:23 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
The quote you pulled from “an official Obama sight (sic)” proposes greater transparency of earmarks, not a widescale elimination of them, as McSame and Caribou Barbie propose.
But the overarching poit here:
The First Law of Internet posting takes another scalp...
September 18th, 2008 at 8:31 pmNow I understand why she is no longer a sportscaster. She must have spoken during a broadcast.
September 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pm“Palin for Dummies” Book One:
“Oil and coal.”
As you know, oil and coal are both fossil fuels, one of which Alaska has (oil) and one which it doesn’t (coal - at least not in significant quantities). These fossil fuels came from dinosaurs, which everyone knows were saved from destruction by the Grace of God as expressed through His Mercy in Noah’s Ark. But they all died off some 6,000 years ago so that we could have Life in Abundance through burning their remains.
“Of course, it’s a fungible commodity…”
Fungible is a word like fungus, and fungus grows best by keeping it in the dark and feeding it bullshit.
“and they don’t flag, you know, the molecules…”
I mean, that would be rediculous, putting little American Flags on all those tiny molecules.
“…where it’s going and where it’s not. “
Just like me and this reply. No one knows where I’m going, and where I’m not. That’s because I’m the world’s foremost expert on energy. And experts are supposed to speak in a language nobody understands. Just like when I speak in tongues at my church.
“But in the sense of the Congress today…”
And thank God Congress lacks any sense.
“…they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first.”
Exxon’s profits aren’t nearly high enough. Neither are the other oil companies. Think of all those starving CEO’s….
“So, I believe that what Congress is going to do,”
Because God told me what Congress is going to do.
“… also, is not to allow the export bans…”
We’re gonna ship that oil to the highest bidder on the Global Market.
“…to such a degree that it’s Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here …”
We’re shipping shopping bags overseas, too. That way Americans cannot get stuck holding the bag which is devoid of energy sources.
“pumped here.”
Now, if I say it, it’s ok. But if Obama says it, it’s sexist. There’s loads of virgin oil fields in Alaska, just waiting to be exploited. And the first to drill is the first to get the thrill of that big gusher.
“It’s got to flow into our domestic markets first.”
And then overseas - to higher profits.
September 20th, 2008 at 9:59 am