If I wanted America to fail

[spence]

We haven't cut off the supply of cheap energy, nobody is trying to make people feel guilty about using energy to heat their homes, we don't "make cheap energy expensive" and bureaucrats haven't outlawed our most abundant sources of energy. It's all bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.

Oil production is up despite diminished reserves. Exports of refined petroleum products like gasoline are at all time highs. Natural gas production domestically is through the roof and we pay a fraction of the EU.

The scientific position on global climate change is backed by a strong majority of the worlds scientists. Teaching this to kids isn't wrong...

The USA is the top lumber producing country in the world. Our total agricultural output has never been higher. Mining output continues to rise...

I'm sorry if people want the rich to pay more, but unfortunately that's where all the wealth is being consolidated.

Regulations are not killing small business, even when evaluated by Republicans Bruce Bartlett: Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs - NYTimes.com

The US has issued more patents in the past two years than ever before and the rate over the past decade is twice that of even the 1980's. Manufacturing innovation is moving faster than ever before (and yes this is my job).

I can't tell you how many times I've heard even MSNBC explain the cost of gas in simple market driven terms.

Carbon credits are are a market driven approach to controlling emissions. They're no more a "made up product" as the entire insurance and investment banking industries.

Spotted owls...are you #^&#^&#^&#^&ing serious?

Let's make another video where mining effluents poison entire ecosystems, banks destroy the family farmer, corporate interests shutter factories in favor of cheap overseas labor evaporating the middle class, where a military industrial complex sucks down tax dollars through a beer bong while cutting social services and a financial industry left to rig the system nearly destroys our economy while raking in billions of profit during the process.

And on...

And on...

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Oil production is up -spence

Spence, oil production is up on PRIVATE LANDS, which Obama has no control over. Obama controls oil production of federal lands. And on federal lands, oil production is not up significantly on his watch.

You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

U.S. oil production up, but not on federal lands - Washington Times

A key quote...

"about 96 percent of the increase [in oil production] since 2007 took place on non-federal lands."

Liberals are trying to put forth a myth that Obama is a friend to big oil. It's a myth.

Obama claiming any credit for the increase in production, is a classic case of the rooster taking credit for the sunrise.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

A key quote...

"about 96 percent of the increase [in oil production] since 2007 took place on non-federal lands.".

So.. it increased 4% on federal lands then?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So.. it increased 4% on federal lands then?

No. I'm saying that 4% of the increase came on federal lands. That's not the same thing as saying that it increased by 4% on federal lands.

The fact that oil production is up a bit on federal lands is not proof that Obama is pro-oil. If oil production is up 5%, but the oil companies say it could be up by 500% if Obama would let them drill, that doesn't paint a pro-oil picture to me.

Frame it however you want. The fact is, liberals are less apt to allow drilling on federal lands than conservatives. If Obama increases production, but that increase is a small fraction of what it could have been, that's worth mentioning.

Just because production is up a bit on federal lands, doesn't mean that pro-drilling folks have nothing to complain about. The relevent statistic isn't how much production increased. What matters is, how much un-tapped wealth are we sitting on for the sake of ideology?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, oil production is up on PRIVATE LANDS, which Obama has no control over. Obama controls oil production of federal lands. And on federal lands, oil production is not up significantly on his watch.

You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

U.S. oil production up, but not on federal lands - Washington Times

A key quote...

"about 96 percent of the increase [in oil production] since 2007 took place on non-federal lands."

Liberals are trying to put forth a myth that Obama is a friend to big oil. It's a myth.

Obama claiming any credit for the increase in production, is a classic case of the rooster taking credit for the sunrise.

You're missing the point.

The video wants to claim energy exploration and production are being suppressed which clearly isn't the case. Quite the contrary in fact our manufacturing output is going to be driven by cheap natural gas for the next several decades.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

You're missing the point.

The video wants to claim energy exploration and production are being suppressed which clearly isn't the case. Quite the contrary in fact our manufacturing output is going to be driven by cheap natural gas for the next several decades.

-spence

"The video wants to claim energy exploration and production are being suppressed which clearly isn't the case"

Spence, just because production is up a bit (or even a lot), doesn't mean it's not being suppressed. If Obama is preventing the oil companies from doing what they would like to do (which is irrefutably the case), he is suppressing production.

Spence, you said that clearly Obama isn't suppressing production? That necessarily means that Obama isn't stopping the oil companies from doing a single thing they'd like to do. That's what zero suppression means. You're saying that's the case? Obama has never said "no" to oil production? That's your claim?

If he has ever said no, then he is suppressing production.

Suppression isn't measured by how much oil production increased over last year. Suppression is measured by the barrels of oil that don't get produced because Obama rejected the permits. That's what suppression means.

Try making that wrong.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The video wants to claim energy exploration and production are being suppressed which clearly isn't the case"

Spence, just because production is up a bit (or even a lot), doesn't mean it's not being suppressed. If Obama is preventing the oil companies from doing what they would like to do (which is irrefutably the case), he is suppressing production.

Spence, you said that clearly Obama isn't suppressing production? That necessarily means that Obama isn't stopping the oil companies from doing a single thing they'd like to do. That's what zero suppression means. You're saying that's the case? Obama has never said "no" to oil production? That's your claim?

If he has ever said no, then he is suppressing production.

Suppression isn't measured by how much oil production increased over last year. Suppression is measured by the barrels of oil that don't get produced because Obama rejected the permits. That's what suppression means.

Try making that wrong.

I don't have to make it wrong, it's inherently wrong for the same reason the video is bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.

There has to be some regulation otherwise we'll see rampant corruption and environmental damage. This is proven by history and supported by a majority of the people.

The question is if the regulation is so burdensome that it slows the progress of the economy. The video doesn't prove that point at all, it simply throws out haunting circular arguments that are easily refuted.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't have to make it wrong, it's inherently wrong for the same reason the video is bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.

There has to be some regulation otherwise we'll see rampant corruption and environmental damage. This is proven by history and supported by a majority of the people.

The question is if the regulation is so burdensome that it slows the progress of the economy. The video doesn't prove that point at all, it simply throws out haunting circular arguments that are easily refuted.

-spence

I didn't say I want zero regulation.

What I'm saying is this...prooduction would be higher (at least in the future if not already) if McCain won in 2008, because he would not have rejected as many permits. And McCain didn't propose to eliminate regulation, he would just have less regulation than Obama. Same with Romney.

Spence, if you're claiming that oil production isn't lower under Obama than it will be if Romney wins, that's absurd. Is that what you're saying?

I'm not sure if the suppression is burdensome to the point that it's hurting the economy (although in my opinion, that's probably the case). But that's not what you said. You said that Obama is clearly not suppressing oil production. That's what you said, and it's false.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I didn't say I want zero regulation.

What I'm saying is this...prooduction would be higher (at least in the future if not already) if McCain won in 2008, because he would not have rejected as many permits. And McCain didn't propose to eliminate regulation, he would just have less regulation than Obama. Same with Romney.

Spence, if you're claiming that oil production isn't lower under Obama than it will be if Romney wins, that's absurd. Is that what you're saying?

I'm not sure if the suppression is burdensome to the point that it's hurting the economy (although in my opinion, that's probably the case). But that's not what you said. You said that Obama is clearly not suppressing oil production. That's what you said, and it's false.

This is exactly what's wrong with the argument, you're peseverating on issues or scenarios that are largely irrelevant.

Odds are that oil production under McCain/Obama/Romney scenarios aren't going to be all that different. Yes, Obama has slowed Gulf permitting but McCain would have had to deal with the Gulf spill just like Obama did.

The reality is that oil demand in the US is way down and as a result we're exporting refined fuels.

The reality is that domestic natural gas production is way up and it's attractive price is a boon for manufacturing.

Back to the video...ideologically driven regulation is supposed to be causing energy costs to skyrocket and killing our economy...

Not happening.

-spence