If I wanted America to fail

[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