• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

Jesus watching the most hateful people claiming to be his followers

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

You cannot shame the shameless.

With all due respect and assumptions of good faith, please fuck off into the sun.

The “burn-it-down” people are good with that until they become part of the kindling.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

The real work of an opposition party is to hold the people in power accountable.

They fucked up the fucking up of the fuckup!

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

American history and black history cannot be separated.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Republicans in disarray!

Their shamelessness is their super power.

When you’re in more danger from the IDF than from Russian shelling, that’s really bad.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

the 10% who apparently lack object permanence

Every reporter and pundit should have to declare if they ever vacationed with a billionaire.

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Elections / Election 2008 / Drilling for Stupidity and Hitting a Gusher: The Painful Inanity of Chris Matthews

Drilling for Stupidity and Hitting a Gusher: The Painful Inanity of Chris Matthews

by John Cole|  June 18, 20081:47 pm| 160 Comments

This post is in: Election 2008, Media, Republican Stupidity, General Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

Yesterday on Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: With gas moving up towards five bucks a gallon, Chrystia, do you think that the voters of the United States, if they had a plebiscite and everybody got to vote, wouldn‘t vote right now to open up the Arctic wilderness, wouldn‘t vote right now for off-shore if it could get them $2 gas (INAUDIBLE) gas? Wouldn‘t they be very pragmatic and say, Enough of the environmentalism, we want the cheaper gas?

Other things a “plebiscite” of Americans would “pragmatically” vote for unanimously:

A cure for cancer
Free ponies
Lottery wins for everyone
Genetically modified healthy pizza

Of course, if we could go to the polls and “make it happen,” we would vote for gasoline to be $2.00 a gallon. But why stop there? Why not $1.00? Or better yet- FREE!

The thing is, though, if we start offshore drilling immediately, and I will throw in drilling in ANWR and anywhere else you want to drill, the price of gas is not going to drop to $2.00 a gallon. It just isn’t- oil is a fungible commodity, is restricted by our refining capacity, and so on (take note of the fact that the production of gas-guzzling SUV’s is tapering off– think there is a connection to oil prices? ). Not to mention the overseas demand in places like China and India and whatnot are going to double over the next ten years. So $2.00 gasoline is just a pipe dream, most certainly will not happen in the long term, and definitely not in the short term.

This is not to say that I am fundamentally opposed to offshore drilling- I have repeatedly stated that any rational energy policy needs to look at every available possibility, to include drilling, increased refining, higher CAFE standards (not the weak increases that just passed that will not take place until 2020), targeted tax cuts aimed at spurring technological advances in green technologies, nuclear power, and so forth, but the notion we can drill our way out of our current problem is absurd. As such, it should surprise approximately NO ONE that this will become a key plank in the 2008 Republican election gambit. Unfortunately for the Republicans, some of the chief supporters of the ban are… Republicans, as the LA Times notes:

President Bush today called on Congress to clear the way for offshore drilling by the states, saying that it could match current production for 10 years and that new methods allow drilling that protects habitats against oil spills.

With Democrats in Congress opposed to drilling, Bush said their opposition is “outdated and counterproductive” and that it “helped drive gas prices to their current level.” Saying that $4-a-gallon gas prices should be “enough incentive” for Democrats to act, Bush asked, “How high do gas prices have to rise before the Democratic Congress will do something about it?”

Bush also called for exploration of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a new push for refineries (he blamed “lawsuits and red tape” for the fact that no new refineries have been built in 30 years) and mining of shale rock for oil.

The president made no mention of his father, President George H.W. Bush, who banned coastal oil exploration in 1990, or his brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who long opposed it. Except to say that much of U.S. energy now “comes from abroad, that’s what’s changed in the last few decades,” putting “our economy and our security at risk.”

In short, yes, Chris Matthews, a plebiscite would probably vote for gasoline at $2.00 a gallon, but what would be awesome is if there was some way, some form of giant medium where the sort of information discussed above could get out to the general public. Some system by which allegedly informed individuals could spread this message to large numbers of people, and when politicians claim that offshore drilling and drilling in ANWR will magically return us to $2.00 gasoline, these allegedly informed people could call “bullshit!” and let the public know the pols are full of it. Maybe even a system in which things are “broadcast” into people’s homes on a box-like apparatus with pictures and sound. Maybe they could even use high-speed cables and satellite to beam that information to consumers. That would be awesome, but it would probably require that the people sending the message be smarter than a stump.

I guess we can hope that a magical technology like this is right around the corner. I bet a plebiscite of the American public would support this kind of technology.

*** Update ***

And then you have this:

As President Bush considers repealing a ban on drilling off most of the coast of the United States, a shortage of ships used for such drilling promises to impede any rapid turnaround in oil exploration. Slow growth in oil supplies has been a major factor in the spike in oil and gasoline prices.

In recent years, a global shortage of drill-ships has created a critical bottleneck, frustrating energy company executives and constraining their ability to exploit known reserves or find new ones, at a time of soaring demand.

As oil trades at more than $135 a barrel — up from $68 a year ago — the world’s drill-ships are booked solid for the next five years. Some oil companies have been forced to postpone exploration while waiting for a drilling rig, executives and analysts said.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Dodd Should Know Better
Next Post: We’re Number One! »

Reader Interactions

160Comments

  1. 1.

    Joshua Norton

    June 18, 2008 at 2:07 pm

    One thing they leave out of this “there must be a pony” scenario is that in the beginning it being said that the ANWR oil would more likely be sold to China due to the cost to move it to the US. There’s no guarantee it would end up on our markets, or that there would even be enough to make any difference what so ever.

  2. 2.

    Andrew

    June 18, 2008 at 2:09 pm

    If ANWR were to instantly start producing at maximum capacity right this very second, it might knock 5-10 cents off the cost of gasoline. That’s it. The end.

    I can show my math if anyone cares.

  3. 3.

    Joe Max

    June 18, 2008 at 2:11 pm

    And yet, Keith Olbermann’s reportage is called “advocacy” by Matthews and his ilk.

    I’ll take advocacy over stupidity any day.

  4. 4.

    The Moar You Know

    June 18, 2008 at 2:14 pm

    Maybe even a system in which things are “broadcast” into people’s homes on a box-like apparatus with pictures and sound

    We have such a thing. It’s called Lite-Brite.

  5. 5.

    Joshua Norton

    June 18, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    wouldn‘t vote right now to open up the Arctic wilderness, wouldn‘t vote right now for off-shore if it could get them $2 gas (INAUDIBLE) gas? Wouldn‘t they be very pragmatic and say, Enough of the environmentalism, we want the cheaper gas?

    They’ve mastered the Subjunctive Vote. Make up any scenario at all and have an argument on that instead of whatever facts may be involved.

  6. 6.

    Mr Furious

    June 18, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    If they opened ANWR up tomorrow, there wouldn’t be a drop of its gas anywhere near any American’s gas tank for ten years.

  7. 7.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    This whole ‘oil drilling’ gambit is a joke. My father-in-law is a rig manager for Exxon-Mobil. He is currently working a land based NG rig in Qatar, but he earned his stripes as a roughneck on Gulf rigs that pumped crude. He is a drill/drill/more drill mental case, but he has shown me the Oz behind the curtain in regards to this bullshit. First, Exxon knew last year that oil would exceed $130 per bbl this year. He called that over a Memorial Day visit. He also told me exactly what Joshua touched on…ANWR oil would be too costly to mainline to the continental US and it would probably be siphoned off to Asia because of transportation costs. As far as the refinery argument, EM has no intention of building any refineries because they know it would be a loss leader move. With supply going down and use falling due to pricing, they would never recoup the initial investment to build. Refineries run now at 80 – 85% capacity with the occasional constraint due to infrastructure upgrades, seasonal blend changes, or interruptions due to nat. causes (see Katrina). Also, there are over 10 million acres of sea in the Gulf recently opened for exploration…not one major oil producer has attempted to take advantage of the lease opportunites. But according the Dick (Energy Baron) Cheney, China is currently drilling in Boca Raton.

  8. 8.

    montysano

    June 18, 2008 at 2:17 pm

    John,

    Thanks so much for posting this. I’ve been listening to Hannity and Limbaugh’s bullshit and it’s about to drive me insane. Hannity’s latest line is that “We’ve got more oil in North America than all of the Middle East!” This is total nonsense.

    I can show my math if anyone cares.

    Me too. In fact, I’ve shown my math to some friends and co-workers lately, and they didn’t like it much. Of course, facts have that well known liberal bias.

    No one will tell us the truth, because the truth is hard. The truth is: the Age of Easy Motoring (h/t JH Kunstler) is over.

  9. 9.

    Z

    June 18, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    So wait… (plebiscite scratches head).. do I have to go to Alaska to get my free pony?

  10. 10.

    rob!

    June 18, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    Christ, Matthews is all over the target more than Amy Winehouse with a bow and arrow set.

    somedays–like when he was pinning down that LA radio guy over “appeasement”–he’s right on the money. but then yesterday he was mocking Al Gore, calling him “The Jolly Green Giant” (which means…what, exactly?) for no good reason.

    i’m ready to watch him go to MTP so MSNBC can clear a space for Maddow.

  11. 11.

    The Moar You Know

    June 18, 2008 at 2:20 pm

    As far as the refinery argument, EM has no intention of building any refineries because they know it would be a loss leader move. With supply going down and use falling due to pricing, they would never recoup the initial investment to build.

    Thank you, Foxhunter – that’s a piece of the puzzle I didn’t understand.

  12. 12.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    Of course, if we could go to the polls and “make it happen,” we would vote for gasoline to be $2.00 a gallon. But why stop there? Why not $1.00? Or better yet- FREE!

    To hell with that. I demand the repeal of gravity and aging!

  13. 13.

    mitch

    June 18, 2008 at 2:22 pm

    John, your snark is always an epic win.

  14. 14.

    Ninerdave

    June 18, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    If they opened ANWR up tomorrow, there wouldn’t be a drop of its gas anywhere near any American’s gas tank for ten years.

    Actually I’m hearing two to three years, but the point is the same. It’s not a quick fix. In fact there IS NO QUICK FIX to gas prices.

    I wouldn’t be opposed to opening up ANWR or off shore drilling as long as it was part of a real comprehensive plan to get us the fuck off oil as our primary energy source in this country.

    Nuclear, solar, wind, hydrogen, all of it, need to be under active development. Really if we can put a man on the moon in a few years, why can’t we reduce our consumption of oil? Why isn’t there a NASA or Manhattan Project under which the brightest bulbs in this country rework how we use energy in this country?

  15. 15.

    nightjar

    June 18, 2008 at 2:25 pm

    Although I bitch and moan at least as much as everyone else about the high cost of gas, the truth is, the best way to reduce the price of gas is to use less of it. And the only way most Americans (including me) will use less gas is for the price to stay high, or go higher.

    I wonder how healthy it is for our economy, and us, to blindly follow the notion that the only way to live is to promote limitless all out economic growth, all the time — at least for the long term. Especially with the specter of Global Warming looming larger every day.

    /navel gazing

  16. 16.

    SpotWeld

    June 18, 2008 at 2:27 pm

    The petro- industry knows it’s in a decline. There is just no way to get the money back from large initial capital expenditures. So all they can do is suck as much money as they can from the increasinly more expensive produce product.

    Attempts to change over US industry to any other fuel/energy supply diminish the profitability of this “suck” effort and are met with resistance in any way possible.

    The avenues of profit from oil are shutting down (I’m talking a multiple decades timeframe here).

  17. 17.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:28 pm

    that’s a piece of the puzzle I didn’t understand

    It’s a piece of the puzzle they don’t want you to know.

    I could go on forever about the innards of Exxon-Mobil, but I don’t want to crash the comments section. Let’s just say that while drilling proponents like to lampoon the recent Congressional hearings on the subject, the committe members get bamboozled every time because of their limited knowledge of the oil industry. This is a direct result of secret energy meetings and creative accounting. Rumor has spread though to many employees that in the near future Exxon-Mobil may completely exit the oil industry all together. Sell to a larger multi-national and bestow the profits on the shareholders. They see that the long term for them may not be so bright. They have no had any substantial re-investment in infrastructure in years. There has to be a reason for this.

    Did anyone see the article last year about the extremely degraded condition of the Alaskan pipeline? BP has neglected the transport train and it leaks like a sieve at many points. What have they done about it? Not much….

    These oil/gas produces like to bathe in money.

  18. 18.

    Brodude

    June 18, 2008 at 2:30 pm

    snarkmeter is off the charts with the post, John.

  19. 19.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 2:31 pm

    Um, you’re missing the narrative entirely – as is most of the country.

    There are existing leases to drill that were handed out decades ago that are going unused by the oil companies. Put simply, there is oil in the ground that the oil companies have every right to pursue at this very moment that they choosing to keep in the ground.

    Why?

    Well, the price of oil is currently banging around $135/bbl. It was around $60/bbl 18 months ago. The thing the oil companies have done to warrant that increase is TO NOT TAKE MORE OIL OUT OF THE GROUND. That’s the innovation.

    Commodities are really cool things. Prices track fairly linearly to supply/demand until you hit the point that the supply simply doesn’t exist any more. So long as everyone agrees to not increase supply, prices will now move along a different curve. To get 2x as much money out of the oil market below the demand point, you pretty much need to pump 2x as much oil. Alternatively, you can push the supply about 5% below demand and get the same 2x as much money simply through higher prices driven by the market, and all you need to do is get the other guys to agree to not produce more along with you. It’s much cheaper than all the exploring, drilling, labor, etc. Plus, by leaving oil in the ground, you get to make money over a longer period of time because there will be more there later to pump.

    To an oil company, it’s perfectly ethical because it preserves the long-term viability of the company in exchange for the short term cost to consumers. After all, what are consumers going to do – not buy the product? And isn’t that precisely the kind of decision every company makes when they decide to increase the price of a product to fund development of the next product? In the case of oil prices, it’s the *consumers* choosing to raise prices, not even the oil companies. I think the Cxxs in big oil sleep pretty well at night.

    Anyway, more leases won’t help, because that’s not the problem given that leases are currently sitting unused.
    Lower taxes, more incentives won’t help, because that’s not the problem (the drillers have billions of COH)
    The stations make almost no money (see Exxon Mobile selling theirs)
    The refiners make almost no money (see Velaros balance sheet)
    It costs about $5 to get a barrel of oil out of the ground and delivered. Pretty big up-front costs, but once the stuff is flowing, it costs almost nothing to keep it flowing. So with gross profit margins on extraction currently in the 90% range (overall for the company that goes way down when you add in refining and retailing margins which are near zero) why would they do *anything* different WRT extraction when it’s working about as well as any executive could hope?

  20. 20.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    All of the calls for “Drill, dammit!” are unaccompanied by any calls to raise CAFE standards, finance alternative energy sources, to repeal energy company tax breaks or even to increase the royalty payments on the newly opened leases. Likewise unvisited is the fact that even if the oil companies were able to start tearing up every square inch of the United States tomorrow the oil wouldn’t be forthcoming for at least four years.

  21. 21.

    John Cole

    June 18, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    Um, you’re missing the narrative entirely – as is most of the country.

    There are existing leases to drill that were handed out decades ago that are going unused by the oil companies. Put simply, there is oil in the ground that the oil companies have every right to pursue at this very moment that they choosing to keep in the ground.

    Actually, I linked to Unbossed above which said just that.

  22. 22.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:34 pm

    Ok, missed the date on the BP/Alaskan Pipeline problems…it was two years ago. Sorry about the error.

    Alaska Pipeline repairs.

  23. 23.

    libarbarian

    June 18, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    Other things a “plebiscite” of Americans would “pragmatically” vote for unanimously:

    A cure for cancer
    Free ponies
    Lottery wins for everyone
    Genetically modified healthy pizza

    Internet Tradition Awareness.

    Sorry – I like to beat dead equines.

  24. 24.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 2:36 pm

    BTW, we’ve played this game before with speculation on coal leases. The government finally stepped in and told the coal lease owners that if they didn’t show they were doing anything with it, that they’d lose the lease. Problem solved.

  25. 25.

    Nazgul35

    June 18, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    Better Yet…imagine if we made ourselves 80% independent like the Brazilians, we could sell all our oil to the Indians and Chinese for outrageous profits…

  26. 26.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 2:38 pm

    Actually, I linked to Unbossed above which said just that.

    Ah, right, link #9. Can’t imagine how I could have missed that…

  27. 27.

    jake

    June 18, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    saying that it could match current production for in 10 years

    Fixed.

  28. 28.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Maybe even a system in which things are “broadcast” into people’s homes on a box-like apparatus with pictures and sound.

    IAAOAIT, and this *does* exist!

  29. 29.

    baldheadeddork

    June 18, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Hey John –

    Your post inspired me to do a little digging about just how much oil production and consumption has changed over the last eight years. I found this page at the Energy Information Administration that answers a lot of questions, and poses one big new one.

    Republicans talk a lot about no new refineries being built in 20 years as a reason why gasoline prices have exploded in the last few years. But in the last decade consumption has only gone up by just over ten percent, while prices have increased by 400%. If the problem was refining capacity, when was the last time anyone saw a line at a gas station?

    We hear a lot about the explosion of oil consumption in Asia. Asian consumption has risen by 27% in the last decade but even with that global consumption has “only” risen by 17% in that period. But Asian consumption rose by 63% between 1987-1996, and global consumption rose by 16% in the same period, during which crude and gasoline prices were flat or in decline.

    The dollar? Sure, that’s a factor. But why has oil seen double-digit inflation while all other imported goods have seen much more modest increases?

    It doesn’t add up. This isn’t the work of market forces, demand has only fallen behind supply once in the last decade and then only by 1.3%. If the value of the dollar is the culprit, then why have crude oil prices alone taken such a huge share of the hit?

    Could it be that the initial run up in 1999 and 2000 were in response to deflation in the petroleum markets over the preceding years, but what’s happened since is the result of a compliant government turning its back while the price was manipulated?

  30. 30.

    RSA

    June 18, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    President Bush today called on Congress to clear the way for offshore drilling by the states, saying that it could match current production for 10 years and that new methods allow drilling that protects habitats against oil spills.

    Why do I suspect that President Bush is a lying sack of shit with respect to both claims?

  31. 31.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    If the problem was refining capacity, when was the last time anyone saw a line at a gas station?

    It is not a refining issue. Martin laid out a nice synopsis of the pricing issue/incentive to hoard and I stated in an earlier comment that refineries aren’t operating at full cap. 80% is the normal capacity, higher due to mechanical issues/blend changes.

  32. 32.

    Jill

    June 18, 2008 at 2:45 pm

    I can’t wait to learn what the Republicans in their multimillion dollar condminiums overlooking the Gulf of Mexico in Florida have to say about this.

  33. 33.

    Jack H.

    June 18, 2008 at 2:47 pm

    Matthews has been faltering a bit of late, but it’s good to see he can still bring the stupid.
    I’ve noticed Matthews has been putting a lot of women on his show lately. No doubt to try reform his well deserved misogynist reputation. His show is certainly better for it.

  34. 34.

    dr. bloor

    June 18, 2008 at 2:48 pm

    Chrissy wasn’t really interested in the content of what he was saying. He just wanted to get “plebiscite” into the conversation as a way of making a bid for the MTP gig.

  35. 35.

    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford

    June 18, 2008 at 2:48 pm

    We’re being Enron-ed again.

  36. 36.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:48 pm

    I can’t wait to learn what the Republicans in their multimillion dollar condminiums overlooking the Gulf of Mexico in Florida have to say about this.

    Well, Jeb Bush was against it before he was for it (as was/is Charlie Crist). Most politicos in the Florida through Texas Gulf region. Now it’s a convenient political football, but they really don’t want a Valdez Part Deux in their backyard. But I’m sure you already knew that.

  37. 37.

    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford

    June 18, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    rob! Says:

    …but then yesterday he was mocking Al Gore, calling him “The Jolly Green Giant” (which means…what, exactly?) for no good reason…

    June 18th, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    Rob!,

    It was the “Jowl-ly Green Giant” because Al Gore, like Michael Moore, is fat. And a “Green.” Probably the most high-profile Green in the world. Jowl-ly Green Giant.

  38. 38.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    We’re being Enron-ed again.

    Yes we are.

  39. 39.

    Laughingriver

    June 18, 2008 at 2:52 pm

    For the truth Read through this diary at the GOS

  40. 40.

    libarbarian

    June 18, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    Off-Topic:

    ALL EVEEL IS AHN TEH LEFT!!!

    In politics, there is some goodness on what we call the Left; there is some goodness on what we call the Right; but there is no evil on the Right: all evil is on the Left.

    :eyeroll:

  41. 41.

    Incertus

    June 18, 2008 at 2:57 pm

    On the plus side, this will probably make the coastal states even more pro-Obama, and considering that Obama has a lead in Florida now, where offshore drilling is really unpopular, this should make things even better for him.

  42. 42.

    Incertus

    June 18, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Oh yeah–good one on the research paper title. Like the colon.

  43. 43.

    Jon Karak

    June 18, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Other things a “plebiscite” of Americans would “pragmatically” vote for unanimously:

    Since we’re in the mood for plebiscites, how about a plebiscite for ending the occupation in Iraq?

  44. 44.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 3:03 pm

    I was pleasantly surprised during the Gas Tax Holiday Brouhaha that ordinary people who don’t spend their entire workdays on politics blogs were not fooled by the idea that this would bring them any relief. Is there any evidence that they are fooled by the idea that offshore drilling would make any discernible impact on the oil supply before 10 or so *years* from now?

  45. 45.

    Cris

    June 18, 2008 at 3:03 pm

    if they had a plebiscite and everybody got to vote, wouldn‘t vote right now to open up the Arctic wilderness, wouldn‘t vote right now for off-shore increase the top marginal tax rate to 50% if it could get them $2 gas

    There are ways to get $2/gallon gas, though drilling isn’t one of them.

    As has been mentioned before, drilling offshore and in ANWR have whatever traction they do because they’re invisible to most people who support it.

  46. 46.

    Mark S.

    June 18, 2008 at 3:05 pm

    Rumor has spread though to many employees that in the near future Exxon-Mobil may completely exit the oil industry all together.

    Holy Shit!!!!! That would be conclusive proof that we long ago reached peak oil.

  47. 47.

    anna

    June 18, 2008 at 3:07 pm

    If citizens could vote on such stuff: Why not consider oil as a RESOURCE instead of a commodity, ala electricity? Eliminates speculation and allows for total gov’t regulation. Why would this not be possible/feasible? Thanks.

  48. 48.

    Rich

    June 18, 2008 at 3:07 pm

    Saying that $4-a-gallon gas prices should be “enough incentive” for Democrats to act, Bush asked, “How high do gas prices have to rise before the Democratic Congress will do something about it?”

    Huh. Did Bush really say “Democratic” instead of the GOP-approved “Democrat”? He really is just phoning it in.

  49. 49.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Correct me if I’m wrong(and I probably am), but isn’t it more expensive to extract and/or refine certain types of petroleum, such as that in ANWR? Something about the makeup of the crude that gets extracted and the process of doing so. I seem to remember reading an article to this effect. The jist was that we have plenty of difficult to use oil here but the price would dwarf current prices because of said difficulty of use. According to this article, which I vaguely remember reading, that’s why oil leases go unused while we shop for crude at crazy abdulas house of ass-fuckery(lube available in the gift shop!).

  50. 50.

    Keith

    June 18, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    Maybe even a system in which things are “broadcast” into people’s homes on a box-like apparatus with pictures and sound.

    And a volume control would be great, too, in case the broadcast came from a a large-headed blonde host who talks as if his entire audience is hard-of-hearing.

  51. 51.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    June 18, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    It doesn’t add up. This isn’t the work of market forces, demand has only fallen behind supply once in the last decade and then only by 1.3%. If the value of the dollar is the culprit, then why have crude oil prices alone taken such a huge share of the hit?

    Could it be that the initial run up in 1999 and 2000 were in response to deflation in the petroleum markets over the preceding years, but what’s happened since is the result of a compliant government turning its back while the price was manipulated?

    Martin already explained it.

    Once the oil producers decide that the era of Peak Oil is nigh (and they are better positioned to know than anyone), their incentives to extract drop dramatically.

    Every barrel of oil they pull out to the ground at today’s prices is a barrel they could sell in the future for much more. It is like withdrawing money from a savings account that promises an interest rate well above inflation, or any other return on investment at comparable risk. Why do it? You should only take out what you need to meet expenses and maintain your current lifestyle, and not a penny more.

    The real question is, why have the producers suddenly changed their behaviour? Is it inside information regarding declining production, or something else?

    I’m of the opinion that the cumulative effect of the Iraq wars (GW1 and OIF) and the intrawar sanctions have accelerated the arrival of Peak Oil by locking away one of the few remaining large resevoirs which has been underperforming compared with the fields in other countries (e.g., SA, Mexico, Russia) that are already either past their peak or very close to it.

    The violent instability in Iraq has effectively taken much of the production which could have been coming from their fields off the market and shrunk the producing pool with a greater emphasis on more mature fields, thus creating an artificially early Peak condition. If Iraq were to settle down and maximize production from their fields then that condition might not apply, but the global players in the oil market now recognize that Chimpy has screwed the pooch so badly in Iraq that it ain’t gonna happen anytime soon.

  52. 52.

    Mark S.

    June 18, 2008 at 3:10 pm

    Since we’re in the mood for plebiscites, how about a plebiscite for ending the occupation in Iraq?

    Ha! that’s why we don’t have plebiscites. Though it should be interesting when Iraq’s parliament tells us unequivocally to get the hell out of their country.

  53. 53.

    Dreggas

    June 18, 2008 at 3:17 pm

    let’s not forget yesterday Congress passed a “use it or lose it bill” turns out Oil Co’s already have large tracts of land to drill that they hold leases to but they aren’t drilling…why? Well those profits exxon recorded are a good indicator.

  54. 54.

    Foxhunter

    June 18, 2008 at 3:18 pm

    I’m aware of all internet traditions, too, so I don’t want anyone to think an earlier post of mine was random suppostion. It looks like the potential sell off of Exxon-Mobil made it to print (although I disagree with much of the article).

    Exxon-Mobil’s future.

  55. 55.

    ThymeZone

    June 18, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Matthews is not as much of an idiot as he lets on. He is actually making a good observation, that left to their own devices, the plebes would vote against their own real interests and open up everything to drilling and basically just whore the whole country out to the oil drillers if they were told, and believed, that it would get them cheaper gasoline.

    The idiot part is that he blurts this crap out without context and explanation and leaves the plebes to think that he is seriously sizing up a policy. He thinks that because he talks fast and can have this conversation over lunch with his rich insider friends and have it understood what he really means, he can do that on the air and not end up looking like a complete fool.

    The real idiot part is that he actually sort of knows this, but doesn’t care. He thinks its all just a fun word game and he plays the game and gets paid and goes out to dinner with his pals and doesn’t really care what the plebes take away from the show. Like all of these guys, he thinks it is about him and how clever he is.

  56. 56.

    rob!

    June 18, 2008 at 3:24 pm

    t was the “Jowl-ly Green Giant” because Al Gore, like Michael Moore, is fat. And a “Green.” Probably the most high-profile Green in the world. Jowl-ly Green Giant.

    ohhh, now i get it.

    it still isn’t funny. what the hell does al gore’s weight have to do with anything, why is the host of a national news show making fat jokes, and who is Matthews to goof on someone’s weight? he’s not exactly built like Iggy Pop.

    hmm, now THERE’S a good host for MTP!

  57. 57.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    the global players in the oil market now recognize that Chimpy has screwed the pooch so badly in Iraq that it ain’t gonna happen anytime soon.

    Screwed the pooch for whom? Not for the “global players” I guaran-damn-tee that.

  58. 58.

    Weenus Chumkamnerd

    June 18, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    By the time the oil in ANWR (about three years’ worth at present levels of consumption) would actually start to come on line, we could well have genetically modified bacteria that eat carbon dioxide and shit light, sweet crude, anyway, if Craig Venter is right. In the meantime, howzabout encouraging conservation and helping other alternative energy schemes get off the ground. Nah, that would make too much sense for Bush.

    Why do Republicans hate capitalism and the American can-do spirit?

  59. 59.

    Fledermaus

    June 18, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Alternatively, you can push the supply about 5% below demand and get the same 2x as much money simply through higher prices driven by the market, and all you need to do is get the other guys to agree to not produce more along with you. It’s much cheaper than all the exploring, drilling, labor, etc.

    Plus they can also whine to Congress that they need more tax breaks for exploration like in 2001. Then do more nothing. Lather rinse repeat.

  60. 60.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Why do I suspect that President Bush is a lying sack of shit with respect to both claims?

    People will throw flowers and candy at the oil rigs. They’ll be greeted as drillerators.

  61. 61.

    Punchy

    June 18, 2008 at 3:27 pm

    I dont know what you moonbats are all panty-twisting for. We already possess the 3rd highest (I think) oil nation (Iraq), and we’re 2 months away from taking the 4th (Iran). Add it up, and we’ll be the 7th highest producing nation(s). Or something.

    Shorter: We’ll just keep jacking others for whatever the fuck we run out of.

  62. 62.

    rob!

    June 18, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    OT:

    that asshat who is selling the “if obama is president, can we still call it the white house” button just got banned from any future state GOP convention.

    the name of the store is republicanmarket.com.

    can anyone with a lot of web savvy and a thirst for revenge find a way to redirect all their traffic over to the Obama’s official site or something?

    or would the KKK’s official site be more appropriate?

  63. 63.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    Shorter: We’ll just keep jacking others for whatever the fuck we run out of.

    Just goes to show the importance of scale. If you do that to a liquor store you’re a criminal and they should throw the key away. If you do it to a nation then you’re a popular wartime president and history will vindicate your actions.

  64. 64.

    srv

    June 18, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    I heard/read somewhere that much of “our” Alaskan oil already goes overseas. Does anyone know if that is true?

  65. 65.

    Perry Como

    June 18, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    If the Repubs want to lose Florida, they should insist on building oil rigs off the coast. Nothing says a day at the beach like a big ass oil rig on the horizon.

  66. 66.

    Svensker

    June 18, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    There are 3 “easy” fixes to part of the price of oil:
    1) Strengthen the dollar.
    2) Stop meddling in the Middle East
    3) Stop threatening Iran and indicate to other states (ahem) that they shouldn’t be such loudmouths either.

  67. 67.

    Zifnab

    June 18, 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Matthews is not as much of an idiot as he lets on.
    …
    The idiot part is that…
    The real idiot part is that…

    You lost me.

  68. 68.

    Cris

    June 18, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    We already possess the 3rd highest (I think) oil nation (Iraq), and we’re 2 months away from taking the 4th (Iran). Add it up, and we’ll be the 7th highest producing nation(s).

    I think it’s multiplicative, not additive. So we’ll be the 12th.

  69. 69.

    MH

    June 18, 2008 at 3:34 pm

    I’m pretty sure the first thing a plebiscite of Americans would do, given the chance, is to kick George Bush out of office and beat Cheney in the street with hoses.

  70. 70.

    jenniebee

    June 18, 2008 at 3:35 pm

    So when’s the plebiscite for perkier boobs?

    Also, I’d like a plebiscite for guaranteed healthcare, to remove “computer-related jobs” from the paid overtime exemption, and to make Corporate Evildoing a class-A felony punishable by death. Whaddaya think the hoi polloi would say about those issues, eh Tweety?

  71. 71.

    Cris

    June 18, 2008 at 3:39 pm

    So when’s the plebiscite for perkier boobs?

    voted yes

  72. 72.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 3:41 pm

    I heard/read somewhere that much of “our” Alaskan oil already goes overseas. Does anyone know if that is true?

    Not since 2000. The maximum amount of oil exported from ANS (Alaska North Slope) before then was about 7%. Here’s Snopes on the subject.

  73. 73.

    jaime

    June 18, 2008 at 3:41 pm

    I for one would NOT vote for ponies. Too much poop and not enough space.

  74. 74.

    Scott H

    June 18, 2008 at 3:43 pm

    The last time this territory, off-shore drilling and drilling in the Wildlife Reserve, was covered, with some thoroughness and laid to rest, was when $2-a-gallon gas was an outrage.

  75. 75.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 3:44 pm

    I’m pretty sure the first thing a plebiscite of Americans would do, given the chance, is to kick George Bush out of office and beat Cheney in the street with hoses.

    I’d vote “yes” on seeing Bush and Cheney kicked in the junk by The Rock.

  76. 76.

    Evinfuilt

    June 18, 2008 at 3:45 pm

    Just think of the money it would take for an Oil Company to build the infrastructure to be able to drill for Oil in ANWAR, crossing those vast distances of Permafrost.

    You could legalize drilling in ANWAR and that still doesn’t mean they will drill there (even with the profit motivation above taken out, they still wouldn’t drill there.) Its too pricey and risky an investment for them to do alone. They would require the government to step in and help pay for the burden of drilling there.

    Or I could just sum it up “The Free Market Demands ANWAR be left alone.” but I don’t think the current rethugs would want people to know that.

    This is the same with Refining capacity. Its not worth it to the companies to increase it, the Government would have to foot the bill to increase capacity, and then they’d have to force the oil companies to use it.

    Thats not going to happen, even if all the Republicans in the world wanted it to, their happy Free Market is against them.

  77. 77.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    IAAOAIT, and mocking Tweety is definitely one of them.

    I admit it, I just like working that acronym into comments.

  78. 78.

    crw

    June 18, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    D. Mason Says:

    Correct me if I’m wrong(and I probably am), but isn’t it more expensive to extract and/or refine certain types of petroleum, such as that in ANWR? Something about the makeup of the crude that gets extracted and the process of doing so. I seem to remember reading an article to this effect. The jist was that we have plenty of difficult to use oil here but the price would dwarf current prices because of said difficulty of use. According to this article, which I vaguely remember reading, that’s why oil leases go unused while we shop for crude at crazy abdulas house of ass-fuckery(lube available in the gift shop!).

    You are correct. Much of the unused crude oil in America is heavy crude oil. This oil is much more difficult to extract and refine than the light and ultra-light crude oil the Middle East produces.

    Also, the focus on ANWR is a good ol’ game of smoke and mirrors. The government is currently in the process of leasing out most of the much larger National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. We don’t need ANWR, or off shore drilling in environmentally sensitive areas, period. This is just more fool the rubes kabuki to gin up more outrage at those DFH tree hugger DemocRATS.

  79. 79.

    ThymeZone

    June 18, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    You lost me.

    Success!

  80. 80.

    b-psycho

    June 18, 2008 at 3:50 pm

    IAAOAIT

    WTFDTAM?

  81. 81.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    June 18, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    I’d be willing to lift the ban on offshore drilling and allow drilling in the ANWR and new refineries to be built to get crazy high fuel efficiency standards, massive investment in renewable energy and some sort of mandate to build or import X amount of alternately fueled vehicles for every gas model built or imported.

    I honestly think we’ve got a situation that is ripe for compromise, should anyone ever get elected that operates that way.

  82. 82.

    Chris Andersen

    June 18, 2008 at 3:52 pm

    You should check out this diary over on DailyKOS. It appears that the “offshore oil drilling ban” is a GOP talking point. There actually is no such ban. There is a moratorium on new leases but there are thousands of existing leases that the oil companies already have that they could be developing but aren’t (for whatever reason).

    By repeating the word “ban” we are giving weight to a GOP talking point. Be warned.

  83. 83.

    LanceThruster

    June 18, 2008 at 3:53 pm

    We could have $2.00 a gallon gas now if we wanted. Just tax the rich to subsidize the difference (since they don’t seem to want to help pay for the war that was supposed to pay for itself).

  84. 84.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 3:54 pm

    WTFDTAM?

    I Am Aware Of All Internet Traditions.

    Now, about that DTAM…”Does That ????? Mean”?

  85. 85.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    June 18, 2008 at 3:57 pm

    By repeating the word “ban” we are giving weight to a GOP talking point. Be warned.

    Ever since Obama got clubbed often and early with the charge he was using right-wing talking points but then it mysteriously never came up again when HRC was doing the god and guns tour through Appalachia, I don’t have a lot of respect for the charge, or for those who trot it out.

  86. 86.

    Shygetz

    June 18, 2008 at 3:57 pm

    Now, about that DTAM…”Does That ????? Mean”?

    My guess…acronym

  87. 87.

    John Cole

    June 18, 2008 at 3:58 pm

    You should check out this diary over on DailyKOS. It appears that the “offshore oil drilling ban” is a GOP talking point.

    From the original post above:

    …and so forth, but the notion we can drill our way out of our current problem is absurd.

    :P

  88. 88.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 4:00 pm

    My guess…acronym

    You’re smarter than me. I was trying to make a swear word fit there, but they all made more sense after the F. As in, “What Does That Mean, Asshole?”

  89. 89.

    The Moar You Know

    June 18, 2008 at 4:01 pm

    Why do Republicans hate capitalism and the American can-do spirit?

    Please. They hate freedom, pure and simple.

  90. 90.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    after the M, I mean.

    F
    is
    for
    FAIL.

  91. 91.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    If you think that gas prices are high, wait ’til you get a load of food prices in the wake of having large swaths of the Midwest under water at planting time.
    Not to worry though, Bush has a plan to drill for wheat in Yosemite National Park.

  92. 92.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 4:03 pm

    We could have $2.00 a gallon gas now if we wanted. Just tax the rich to subsidize the difference (since they don’t seem to want to help pay for the war that was supposed to pay for itself).

    I bet you wouldn’t even have to tax “the rich”. I believe a vastly prohibitive windfall profit tax and a ban on petro speculation would get the job done.

    It’s fucking retarded to sit back and pretend oil companies have to charge these prices because of limited supply as if they aren’t raking in the cash. The profit reports are there for everyone to see. These companies, all of them, are knocking down record breaking coin every quarter and I don’t see any evidence of re-investment.

    BTW, just tossing this out there. Most gas stations don’t have locks of any kind on their underground gas tanks.

  93. 93.

    Chris Andersen

    June 18, 2008 at 4:03 pm

    Thymezone:

    The idiot part is that he blurts this crap out without context and explanation and leaves the plebes to think that he is seriously sizing up a policy. He thinks that because he talks fast and can have this conversation over lunch with his rich insider friends and have it understood what he really means, he can do that on the air and not end up looking like a complete fool.

    Thanks. I never really considered that explanation for Mathews occasional bouts of apparent idiocy. It makes a lot of sense. I tend to think out loud and at a very quick pace. What I am saying makes a lot of sense to me because I understand the context behind my remarks. But if I fail to convey that context to my listeners, what I say can come off sound like total gibberish.

  94. 94.

    Chris Andersen

    June 18, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    John Cole:

    :P

    Okay, so I didn’t realize the dKos diary was by the same person.

    Now stick that toungue back in your mouth before I make an inappropriate comment.

  95. 95.

    jibeaux

    June 18, 2008 at 4:10 pm

    Lots & lots of embedded links that people miss is an internet tradition.

    I’m leaving work now, before people start chucking things at me.

    Which is also an internet tradition.

  96. 96.

    AnneLaurie

    June 18, 2008 at 4:16 pm

    I for one would NOT vote for ponies. Too much poop and not enough space.

    Ah, but Chris Matthews says *these* ponies would poop clean, compact fuel chips that could be dropped directly into your SUV’s gas tank!

    Chris Matthews is tired of hearing people say nice things about Tim Russert. Chris Matthews wants your attention, and he doesn’t care how big a whore he has to make himself to get it. Also, Chris Matthews is probably just clueless (unselfaware) enough to think that if an Obama administration can be spun as Clinton Term III, then Chris Matthews will get to talk about the POTUS Penis live on the teebee again…

  97. 97.

    Zifnab

    June 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    It’s fucking retarded to sit back and pretend oil companies have to charge these prices because of limited supply as if they aren’t raking in the cash. The profit reports are there for everyone to see. These companies, all of them, are knocking down record breaking coin every quarter and I don’t see any evidence of re-investment.

    Yeah, I think the cat is somewhat out of the bag on that one. People who continue the “oh, but its just capitalism! why do you hate the free market?!” bullshit whine every time gas goes up a quarter and Exxon reaps another quarter trillion in profits has pressed far enough. Oil Companies were making money hand over fist in the 90s, before this nonsense got out of control.

    I’m also completely sick of GOP pols defending special treatment for oil company taxes because forcing them to pay the same Corporate Tax as everyone else would be like raising taxes.

    So much bullshit.

    BTW, just tossing this out there. Most gas stations don’t have locks of any kind on their underground gas tanks.

    Most gas stations don’t turn a profit on gas.

  98. 98.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 4:23 pm

    Also, Chris Matthews is probably just clueless (unselfaware) enough to think that if an Obama administration can be spun as Clinton Term III, then Chris Matthews will get to talk about the POTUS Penis live on the teebee again…

    Hell, wait ’til Obama gets elected…
    MATTHEWS: Hardball is honored tonight to interview President-elect Barack Obama. My first question to you, mister president is, Is it true what they say about the way you people are…’gifted?”

  99. 99.

    jake

    June 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm

    If the Repubs want to lose Florida, they should insist on building oil rigs off the coast. Nothing says a day at the beach like a big ass oil rig on the horizon.

    Governors of states with coast line are already raising objections to this idea. So assume Bush gets his way and Congress lifts the ban. The governors either say “FU, you’ll scare the tourists,” or “Fine, but the oil companies have to pay to make up for the loss of tourist dollars.”

    I guess what happens next depends on whether the state has enough of a N.G. to fend off Blackwater thugs.

  100. 100.

    Weenus Chumkamnerd

    June 18, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Ah, but Chris Matthews says these ponies would poop clean, compact fuel chips that could be dropped directly into your SUV’s gas tank!

    Yeah, but do they hoover up CO2 emissions like George W. Bush snorting a line of cocaine off a Mexican hooker’s ass?

    Otherwise, I won’t vote for them.

  101. 101.

    mark k

    June 18, 2008 at 4:41 pm

    Reminds me of the SNL skit, “What if Superman had been on the side of the Nazis in WWII?”

    Tourism, not oil, is the biggest industry in Florida and the world. It would be suicide for Floridas economy to allow drilling off the coast. What idiots. Is every pundit a shill for the oil co.s?

  102. 102.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 4:42 pm

    Most gas stations don’t turn a profit on gas.

    Sorry, look as you might you will not detect a hint of sympathy from me directed at anyone in the petro industry. From the CEO to the cashier, they can all kiss my ass. Any damage done to these freaks at any level, depriving them of goods, employees, profits or outlets to hock their overpriced wares is good in my book, not just good but patriotic.

    The American public basically paid for the infrastructure that allows them to reap global fortunes and continues to let them operate under a tax scheme that is embarrassingly beneficial to the mega-corps in question. They get some of the most preferential treatment of any industry and still they fleece the public that put them where they are.

    I have reached the point where my opinions towards the petro industry are borderline radical and I’m not ashamed to admit it because I think a rapidly growing minority agree with me.

  103. 103.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    It’s awesome to see how many Republicans are willing to selflessly fuck over the tourist economies and the coastlines of states in which they do not live so that someone can tailgate me in a Hummer.

  104. 104.

    Xenos

    June 18, 2008 at 4:49 pm

    I can’t wait to learn what the Republicans in their multimillion dollar condminiums overlooking the Gulf of Mexico in Florida have to say about this.

    >>Well, Jeb Bush was against it before he was for it (as was/is Charlie Crist). Most politicos in the Florida through Texas Gulf region. Now it’s a convenient political football, but they really don’t want a Valdez Part Deux in their backyard. But I’m sure you already knew that.

    Well, it is not like tourism is a very big part of Florida’s economy.

    Obama needs to make some mild statement about conservation, not drilling being the answer, let the GOP firestorm machine put itself on record as insisting on drilling, and then go on a tour of Florida promising to protect all the tourism jobs from the Republicans. He can tie the state up in just a few days if he plays this right.

    If McCain can’t hold onto Florida, he is toast. If he falls behind now, he will not catch up anywhere else.

  105. 105.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 4:51 pm

    Bush has a plan to drill for wheat in Yosemite National Park.

    Fuck that. Just drill for beer. Keep me hammered 24/7 and I won’t care what the price of gas is.

    Oh, and what if the ponies had perky boobs? Would that help?

  106. 106.

    ThymeZone

    June 18, 2008 at 4:55 pm

    what if the ponies had perky boobs? Would that help?

    I can’t speak for everyone, but, yes.

  107. 107.

    Joe Beese

    June 18, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    McCain will have to convince the Floridians that they can’t spend their tourism money if they’ve been blown up by teh ZOMG! terrorists.

  108. 108.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 4:59 pm

    If ANWR were to instantly start producing at maximum capacity right this very second, it might knock 5-10 cents off the cost of gasoline. That’s it. The end.

    That’s plain bullshit, check this out:

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/81394-speculation-and-the-price-of-oil

    Short story: the reason the price of oil is so high is because the world perceives that it is going to go even higher over the medium term future, so the the world is trying to acquire inventory but can’t do it.

    If the world perceived that supply and demand were fundamentally in equilibrium, the price would stabilize. ANWR (and offshore) are not about driving the price/gallon down to $2, it’s more about preventing a $3-4 increase [B]from where it is now[/B].

  109. 109.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 5:00 pm

    I’ll take advocacy over stupidity any day.

    That’s great because w/ KO you can get both.

  110. 110.

    Dennis - SGMM

    June 18, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    Oh, and what if the ponies had perky boobs? Would that help?

    Voila
    NSFW

  111. 111.

    montysano

    June 18, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    We have alternatives. Concentrated solar looks promising. The money quote from the article:

    The United States has enormous solar energy potential. For example, a 100 mile by 100 mile plot of land in Nevada, fitted with CSP trough systems, could provide enough electricity for the entire United States,
    according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

    Now, to be sure, building a 100 mile x 100 mile solar complex in the desert is quite a task. But you have to think that the $2T that we’re pouring down a hole in the Middle East might have financed a good start.

  112. 112.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 5:05 pm

    Why isn’t there a NASA or Manhattan Project under which the brightest bulbs in this country rework how we use energy in this country?

    Because the Democratic Party, including (or especially) Barack Obama doesn’t really pay close attention to the real world and thinks the whole thing is a matter of demagoguery of oil companies.

    See: Tax, Windfall Profits

  113. 113.

    Weenus Chumkamnerd

    June 18, 2008 at 5:09 pm

    Holy shit, Dennis! Does that thing give rides (I hope?)

  114. 114.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 5:11 pm

    Could it be that the initial run up in 1999 and 2000 were in response to deflation in the petroleum markets over the preceding years, but what’s happened since is the result of a compliant government turning its back while the price was manipulated?

    See the link a few posts back. The world perceives now (and didn’t perceive then) that the supply and demand for oil is in fundamental disequilibrium.

  115. 115.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 5:14 pm

    Sorry, look as you might you will not detect a hint of sympathy from me directed at anyone in the petro industry. From the CEO to the cashier, they can all kiss my ass. Any damage done to these freaks at any level, depriving them of goods, employees, profits or outlets to hock their overpriced wares is good in my book, not just good but patriotic.

    Keep in mind that there are 3 major components to the petro industry:

    Drilling, Refining, Retail.

    Retail can literally be anyone. Costco, Exxon-Mobile, and your aunt Bee are all in the same market here. Costco effectively makes zero on gas. It’s a loss-leader for them. It gets my car to their store on a regular basis, and that’s half the battle for retail.

    The problem is aunt Bee. Two summers ago I took the family on a road trip. 7,000 miles across the US and Canada. Most of the stations we hit were in East Jesus, Nebraska and Gretsky, Alberta. Tiny mom-and-pops that clearly served up more diesel and ethanol than gas. These are critical businesses for a town that’s 20 miles from nowhere. After all, if they close down, it’s 40 miles ($8-$20) round trip for the privilege of fueling up the F-150.

    Yeah, I don’t give a fuck about Exxon either, but I do care about the other half of the retail market. They’re trying to compete with Exxon from corner to corner after all, and don’t have the $130/bbl profits on oil to subsidize them. They try and make up for that by pushing Marlboros and coffee, but in a lot of the country that lone gas station provides a critical service.

    The refiners are a similar but far less diverse market. There are some pure refiners out there. Velaro expanded into retail, so basically they’re screwed coming and going since they have no drilling operation – and that’s where all the profits are. The drillers are raping everyone else. Focus on them. That’s the only part of big oil that really deserves to be hit hard.

  116. 116.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    3) Stop threatening Iran and indicate to other states (ahem) that they shouldn’t be such loudmouths either.

    The bad news is that wrt to Iran and oil we are fkkked every which way. The Iranian economy is a shambles and they don’t have things like the rule of law and the right to private property.

    Oil exploration and extraction doesn’t happen by itself. It requires lots of investment, creativity and patience. A lot of oil producers want to use their resources as a national ATM. Venezuela and Iran are the worst offenders.

  117. 117.

    Oregon Guy

    June 18, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    Oil exploration and extraction doesn’t happen by itself. It requires lots of investment, creativity and patience.

    Yeah, coming up with a sack of lies about “Weapons of Mass Destruction” was real creative. And patient.

    But Venezuela and Iran (two nations which have never invaded their neighbors) are the bad guys.

  118. 118.

    Martin

    June 18, 2008 at 5:24 pm

    Now, to be sure, building a 100 mile x 100 mile solar complex in the desert is quite a task. But you have to think that the $2T that we’re pouring down a hole in the Middle East might have financed a good start.

    Why waste NV?

    Every parking lot should get solar canopies. Cool down the urban areas, cool down your car, get energy, block light pollution at night (the lot lights have no upward exposure). Suck for hurricane areas, but most of the country would do fine.

    Virtually every elementary school is idle after 3 PM, every weekend, every summer, use very little power as a function of square footage and have massive roof areas. Just pave them in panels and dump all the excess on the grid. Being public spaces, you don’t even need to ask permission. For bonus points, subsidize the cost of the panels by the feds and let the district keep the profits to fund education.

    Expand these kinds of opportunities as appropriate and problem solved.

  119. 119.

    rawshark

    June 18, 2008 at 5:32 pm

    As I’ve said before, drilling in ANWR won’t lower the price of gasoline. It will just provide oil sellers with more oil to sell. Every drop of oil will be put in a barrel and sold on the market. And they’d be stupid to sell it anything less than the market rate. Even if they tried to sell at less than market rate for a barrel of oil OPEC would rape them.
    But of course this is all hopeless. Millions of people are hearing that there are billions of barrels of oil that liberals won’t let the oil comapnies use to lower the cost of gas at the pump. I know this because O hang out with Rush disciples. They need to hear this stuff.

  120. 120.

    Pooh

    June 18, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    So wait… (plebiscite scratches head).. do I have to go to Alaska to get my free pony?

    We’re fresh out up here, sorry.

  121. 121.

    Scott H

    June 18, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    Why isn’t there a NASA or Manhattan Project under which the brightest bulbs in this country rework how we use energy in this country?

    That would be the Department of Energy formed in 1977 for that very purpose, among others.

    Many federal agencies have been established to handle various aspects of U.S. energy policy, dating back to the creation of the Manhattan Project and the subsequent Atomic Energy Commission. The impetus for putting them all under the auspices of a single department was the 1973 energy crisis, in response to which President Jimmy Carter proposed creation of the department. The enabling legislation was passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Carter on August 4, 1977. The department began operations on October 1, 1977. Wiki

    Think of it as the Department of Homeland Security of its day.

  122. 122.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    The drillers are raping everyone else. Focus on them. That’s the only part of big oil that really deserves to be hit hard.

    Look, I get what you’re saying. I’m just not looking at this from a viewpoint tainted by morality. I used to care about all the things you’re mentioning but I just don’t anymore.

    As for the retailer, I’ve walked away from decent jobs for which I didn’t have a replacement because I didn’t agree with the practices of the company. When making a dime becomes so abhorrent that any decent person would walk away from it I expect them to do so. If they don’t, to hell with them.

  123. 123.

    Capt. Jean-Luc Pikachu

    June 18, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    Alaska Senator Ted Stevens commissioned a study into the price of oil w/rt drilling in ANWR… The report declared that if Congress opened ANWR to drilling, the price of oil would decrease ~$0.75/barrel… 10 years from now. -_-

    Screw the caribou, let’s roll…

  124. 124.

    rawshark

    June 18, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    Koz Says:

    Short story: the reason the price of oil is so high is because the world perceives that it is going to go even higher over the medium term future, so the the world is trying to acquire inventory but can’t do it.

    The price of oil is high because people think it will go higher so they are driving up the price. Did I get that right?

  125. 125.

    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford

    June 18, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    rob! Says:

    ohhh, now i get it.

    it still isn’t funny. what the hell does al gore’s weight have to do with anything, why is the host of a national news show making fat jokes, and who is Matthews to goof on someone’s weight? he’s not exactly built like Iggy Pop.

    hmm, now THERE’S a good host for MTP!

    June 18th, 2008 at 3:24 pm

    Peppermint Patty, in her Margaret Carlson disguise, verbally swatted Matthews’ hand and admonished him with a “Hey, we all have jowls…” It was touching.

  126. 126.

    Tax Analyst

    June 18, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    “BULLSHIT” Call of the Day, John Cole. Damn, I’m glad I wasn’t watching that blob of blab when he tossed that question out…I might have thrown something hard and solid at my TV screen – or just tossed the whole damned thing out the fucking window.

    He (Matthews) really does it just to hear his own voice, doesn’t he? And he doesn’t give a shit that he’s spreading teh stupid instead of say, trying to provide some useful information or making a cogent argument for a realistic proposal. But, naw…news, shamoows…it’s all just words and if the words don’t promote CHRIS MATTHEWS then CHRIS MATTHEWS will pull some out of his ass that will.

  127. 127.

    ThymeZone

    June 18, 2008 at 5:46 pm

    The price of oil is high because people think it will go higher

    Oil prices are set ahead of delivery. If people think there will be scarcity, they will buy delivery early and try to realize a gain in price before they sell.

    The oil and refined fuels markets are entirely driven by supply and demand in this way. It’s a cash business which is driven entirely by the people with the cash, who are basically doing commodity trading with oil and fuel.

  128. 128.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 5:54 pm

    But Venezuela and Iran (two nations which have never invaded their neighbors) are the bad guys.

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/18/america/18venez.php
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/mega-scandal-in-iran-35-billion-in-oil-money-missing-from-state-coffers/

    Yes, but wrt oil it’s important to understand exactly why and how they’re “bad guys.”

    They want to use oil to fund their exercise of power, domestically and otherwise. That means that they want to take money out of oil, when production requires that they put money into it.

  129. 129.

    Tenguphule

    June 18, 2008 at 5:56 pm

    Koz says: The Iranian economy is a shambles and they don’t have things like the rule of law

    So they should get along great with America, cause we’re in the same boat.

  130. 130.

    Zifnab

    June 18, 2008 at 5:57 pm

    Fuck that. Just drill for beer. Keep me hammered 24/7 and I won’t care what the price of gas is.

    I’ll drink to that.

    Short story: the reason the price of oil is so high is because the world perceives that it is going to go even higher over the medium term future, so the the world is trying to acquire inventory but can’t do it.

    So, passing a tax on speculators selling oil at higher than $70 / barrel is reckless demagoguery. Pointing out that oil is selling for higher than $70 / barrel because people are greedy-as-fuck selfish back stabbers, then shrugging and playing the “Free Market: Whatchagonnado?” song is Change We Can Believe In.

    Shorter Koz: Lay still, the raping will hurt less.

  131. 131.

    Tenguphule

    June 18, 2008 at 6:00 pm

    Because the Democratic *Republican* Party, including (or especially) Barack Obama George Bush and Fuckstain McCain don’t really pay close attention to the real world and think the whole thing is a matter of demagoguery of oil companies. Drill and Waste.

    Corrected for Accuracy.

    IAAOAIT.

  132. 132.

    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford

    June 18, 2008 at 6:04 pm

    rawshark Says:

    Koz Says:

    Short story: the reason the price of oil is so high is because the world perceives that it is going to go even higher over the medium term future, so the the world is trying to acquire inventory but can’t do it.

    The price of oil is high because people think it will go higher so they are driving up the price. Did I get that right?

    June 18th, 2008 at 5:41 pm

    I don’t think so. Think “Peak Oil” or “Bush Attacks Iran.” Countries are trying to stock up on as much $130/barrel oil as they can so they don’t have to buy as much $140/barrel oil. And onward and upward.

  133. 133.

    Brachiator

    June 18, 2008 at 6:06 pm

    The thing is, though, if we start offshore drilling immediately, and I will throw in drilling in ANWR and anywhere else you want to drill, the price of gas is not going to drop to $2.00 a gallon. It just isn’t- oil is a fungible commodity, is restricted by our refining capacity, and so on (take note of the fact that the production of gas-guzzling SUV’s is tapering off- think there is a connection to oil prices? ). Not to mention the overseas demand in places like China and India and whatnot are going to double over the next ten years. So $2.00 gasoline is just a pipe dream, most certainly will not happen in the long term, and definitely not in the short term.

    The Republicans love to play games with this and the Democrats’ response is so anemic that the fundamental issues get lost in a fog of gas.

    SUV use and demand in places like China and India are not a real issue. I have never seen anything anywhere that seriously connects a rise in oil prices to increased Asian demand.

    Also, since the West has shifted a huge amount of manufacturing to China, and has outsourced all kinds of activities to India, it is in our best interest to make sure that China pays low prices for energy, if we want to continue to consume at the levels we desire. You can’t have it both ways and want the Chinese to pay high fuel prices and still make cheap products for us.

    The oil companies deliberately throttle refining capacity, not crazy environmentalists. And the oil producing companies restrict supply. Oil is kinda like diamonds. There ain’t no shortage except that created by those who control the supply.

    You may still be able to search for the April 20 NYT piece “The Big Thirst,” by Jad Mouawad, that pointed out:

    Oil prices rose above $116 a barrel last week, setting another record for the world’s most indispensable energy commodity. What was striking about this latest milestone was what didn’t happen: there was no shortage of oil, no sudden embargo, no exporter turning off its spigot….

    What about OPEC? The 13 members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries account for three-quarters of the world’s proven oil reserves. But for various reasons, most of those countries are making it harder, if not impossible, for foreign oil companies to invest within their borders. With energy prices rising, OPEC producers are seeing record revenues, which have reduced the incentive to dip into their supplies by boosting production.

    Even at the present high prices, the fundamentals have not changed. $2.00 gasoline may be a pipe dream, but not because of supply and demand, or even with all the SUVs that used to be out there, but are now spending more time in the garage than on the road.

    This is not to say that I am fundamentally opposed to offshore drilling- I have repeatedly stated that any rational energy policy needs to look at every available possibility, to include drilling, increased refining, higher CAFE standards (not the weak increases that just passed that will not take place until 2020), targeted tax cuts aimed at spurring technological advances in green technologies, nuclear power, and so forth, but the notion we can drill our way out of our current problem is absurd. As such, it should surprise approximately NO ONE that this will become a key plank in the 2008 Republican election gambit. Unfortunately for the Republicans, some of the chief supporters of the ban are… Republicans

    In the 70s, the GOP and the oil industry promised that if we just laid that Alaska pipeline then we would go a long way toward ending our dependence on foreign oil.

    How’s that working out for us?

    Even though the pipeline is responsible for 17 percent of domestic oil production, the major owner of the consortium responsible for the pipeline operation was British petroleum, not a US company.

    There ain’t no such thing as foreign oil and domestic oil. There is just oil, and those who need to buy it (everyone). All oil goes into the world market, to be bought by whoever wants it. And Middle Eastern oil is still better quality than most other available types of crude.

    And unless somebody is going to suggest that US oil companies be nationalized (fat chance), there is no guarantee that domestic drilling will result in availability to domestic markets.

    Oh yeah, and if warming continues (through whatever cause), the availability of water to cool nuclear reactors declines. Energy policy is tough, and it easily defies the rhetoric being tossed about.

  134. 134.

    Magnus

    June 18, 2008 at 6:59 pm

    In Norway (yeah, we produce quite a bit of oil) we’re having a rather loud discussion about whether to drill in certain off-shore areas which just happen to be the spawning-grounds for our cod population (fish, see?). The question so far has turned on environmental issues (although fish is our third greatest export, and it’s renewable in perpetuity, which *should* make it very valuable indeed), but lately the question has come up as to whether we should drill at all. After all, we (the Norwegian state. Yeah, we’re Commies. Wheee!) now own one percent of all European company stock, and we can’t (they say) spend any more money domestically without heating up our economy. In short, we’ve got more money than we know what to do with. So why should we spend a lot of money drilling for oil that will only become *more* valuable if we leave it alone?

    Well, those are the thoughts of an oil-exporting country. Enjoy.

  135. 135.

    Xenos

    June 18, 2008 at 7:04 pm

    If warming continues, and the permafrost melts, and the sea level rises a few inches, good luck getting to that ANWR oil in any case. Maybe that is the reason for the rush.

  136. 136.

    ThymeZone

    June 18, 2008 at 7:40 pm

    So, passing a tax on speculators selling oil at higher than $70 / barrel is reckless demagoguery

    Actually, it is something like that, if not just totally stupidfuck thinking.

    Oil trading is trading. People buy with the expectation of making a profit, that’s the whole point, that’s what moves oil through the pipes of a pretty free market.

    Creating a penalty for profit is pretty dumb AFAIC. Oil sales are more akin to an auction, anyway, the sellers do not set the price. They pretty much sell to the highest offer. It’s a very capital (cash) driven marketplace, and there is no legitimate rationale for fucking with it mainly because you don’t like the prices. The cure for high demand is to lower demand, not punish the traders.

    Jesus, where does all the stupid come from?

  137. 137.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    Jesus, where does all the stupid come from?

    The Democrats, mostly (though the R’s aren’t much better some days).

  138. 138.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 9:00 pm

    So, passing a tax on speculators selling oil at higher than $70 / barrel is reckless demagoguery. Pointing out that oil is selling for higher than $70 / barrel because people are greedy-as-fuck selfish back stabbers, then shrugging and playing the “Free Market: Whatchagonnado?” song is Change We Can Believe In.

    Just how is that supposed to help? Hmmm…I don’t think you’re appreciating the reality that we need to buy oil more than the sellers need to sell it.

    One thing that crystallized the issue for me was when someone pointed out to me that per capita consumption of oil in China could [I]triple[/I] and still be less than that of [I]Mexico[/I].

    The way things are going now, we have no way of accommodating that demand. Therefore, the price of oil is high [I]now[/I] in anticipation of scarcity [I]later[/I]. You can call that speculation if you like, but it’s the way markets work. In general, I think it’s a good thing, because the world is giving us notice of things that aren’t going well while we still have time to do something about it.

    Now it’s time for the political system to get it’s act in gear. Frankly neither major political power has covered themselves in glory wrt this issue. But between the two Presidential candidates, John McCain is five lengths ahead of the MUP. I suspect he will President substantially because of it.

  139. 139.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 9:24 pm

    Frankly neither major political power has covered themselves in glory wrt this issue. But between the two Presidential candidates, John McCain is five lengths ahead of the MUP

    In what way?

  140. 140.

    Koz

    June 18, 2008 at 9:49 pm

    In what way?

    For starters he’s flipped (in the right direction) toward offshore drilling and nuclear power. More than that, I see McCain as more pragmatic than Obama. So far, the MUP campaign has all the nutional substance of cotton candy from the state fair.

    And besides that, his “nice guy” persona is going to fold like a cheap suit against the entrenched Demo Luddites who we should expect to be the majority in Congress after the election. Sen Edward Kennedy successfully blocked construction of a WIND FARM in theoretically blocking his Hyannisport view.

    Having said that, I don’t either one of them has any sort of apprecation of the magnitude of the oil problem.

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/76621-an-energy-policy-that-makes-sense-revisited

    It’s importannt to emphasize, about ANWR, offshore drilling, nuclear power, or whatever, that you don’t knock out Floyd Mayweather by throwing one punch. That’s why all the bullshit about “pristine” ANWR, six years from now, 1M bbls/day has to be seen for what it is.

  141. 141.

    rawshark

    June 18, 2008 at 10:03 pm

    In general, I think it’s a good thing, because the world is giving us notice of things that aren’t going well while we still have time to do something about it.

    Like this is news.

    ‘We still have time to do something about it’? That time was years ago. You know why we didn’t do anything then? People said this wouldn’t happen, those people are the same people getting rich off it now. Once again a real problem was met with denial by those who wish to profit from the ‘problem’ becoming real. Nice.
    And as usual we get a ‘Squealer’ to come along and explain to us that we’re seeing the issue all wrong. Its not caused by anything nefarious, this is just the natural result of natural forces. To see it otherwise is just wrong. You don’t want to be wrong do you? Or worse, a democrat? No no. Vote McCain he’s telling the story right.

    Fuck, I’m so tired of these people.

    I bet you think global warming is a plan by gay married lefties to allow Osama to abort babies.

  142. 142.

    D. Mason

    June 18, 2008 at 10:09 pm

    For starters he’s flipped (in the right direction) toward offshore drilling and nuclear power.

    Offshore drilling will not do jack shit for our current energy crisis. If it would why are the numerous existing opportunities for such drilling being ignored? Nuclear power will not make my car go forward. Try again.

    More than that, I see McCain as more pragmatic than Obama.

    Captain 100 years in Iraq is pragmatic? Ok yeah you must be joking. My bad for taking you seriously, carry on.

  143. 143.

    TenguPhule

    June 18, 2008 at 10:55 pm

    Koz says: More than that, I see McCain as more pragmatic than Obama. I also believe Iran got the WMDs from Iraq, Torture is Jesus and that It’s not gay as long as your balls don’t touch.

    Completed.

  144. 144.

    TenguPhule

    June 18, 2008 at 10:59 pm

    It’s importannt to emphasize, about ANWR, offshore drilling, nuclear power

    That all of them are bad ideas.

    ANWR is not about cheap oil or gas. It is about stupid fucks shooting themselves in the foot to make an oil executive a buck. Unless you nationalize the oil industry, they drill when they want and how much they want. Can’t afford it? Fuck you America, someone else can.

    Offshore drilling, we drill, you pay. We fuck up, Oops your mess to clean up.

    Nuclear power, sure that waste will solve itself, it’s not like it’s just sitting in all those plants…oh wait.

    Koz, conclusive proof that Darwin isn’t working hard enough.

  145. 145.

    Koz

    June 19, 2008 at 1:36 am

    Offshore drilling will not do jack shit for our current energy crisis.

    Sure it will. If the world perceives that we will have enough supply to meet our needs, then the price can go back down.

    If it would why are the numerous existing opportunities for such drilling being ignored?

    Maybe because the majority party in Congress and the MUP are both talking about a windfall profits tax.

    Nuclear power will not make my car go forward. Try again.

    Soon enough it will. At the moment the crisis in oil, not necessarily energy in general. But, now that we’ve already gone through this once, let’s not do it again. And when, say five or ten years from now, we’re using various forms of battery power for transport, we need to be able to handle the increased demand for power in general.

  146. 146.

    Koz

    June 19, 2008 at 1:49 am

    Once again a real problem was met with denial by those who wish to profit from the ‘problem’ becoming real. Nice.

    Great, I hope you’re making money off the oil crisis then.

  147. 147.

    Koz

    June 19, 2008 at 1:52 am

    ANWR is not about cheap oil or gas. It is about stupid fucks shooting themselves in the foot to make an oil executive a buck.

    Great, we want the oil that’s buried below the ANWR. How do you propose to get it?

  148. 148.

    TenguPhule

    June 19, 2008 at 3:37 am

    Great, we want the oil that’s buried below the ANWR.

    And you’re never going to get it.

    The oil goes to China. Exxon laughs and walks away.

    Koz continues to be a dumb fuck.

    The world goes on.

  149. 149.

    TenguPhule

    June 19, 2008 at 3:38 am

    At the moment the crisis in oil, not necessarily energy in general.

    Same smell. Oil is the energy behind the whole fucking transport system.

    Now let the adults take charge and return to picking your navel.

  150. 150.

    Xenos

    June 19, 2008 at 5:48 am

    Creating a penalty for profit is pretty dumb AFAIC. Oil sales are more akin to an auction, anyway, the sellers do not set the price. They pretty much sell to the highest offer. It’s a very capital (cash) driven marketplace, and there is no legitimate rationale for fucking with it mainly because you don’t like the prices. The cure for high demand is to lower demand, not punish the traders.

    Jesus, where does all the stupid come from?

    The stupid? You are soaking in it.

    Speculaters can play an important role as market makers in trading systems, but there is no need for anyone to make a market in energy. Currently you pay less taxes if you speculate in the oil futures market than you do if you actually take delivery of the stuff and put it to use. If you increase the taxes on the speculation, you take much of the profit out of it, and the market will function better. For one thing, it will be easier for businesses to lock in prices in advance and to hedge against natural market volatility.

    How much will it reduce the price of gas at the pump? Some say 5%, some say 50%. I expect that the correct figure is closer to 5 than 50, but either way penalizing speculation will reduce volatility, which certainly is a good thing.

  151. 151.

    Googootz

    June 19, 2008 at 6:59 am

    Another factor that is overlooked is the weak US dollar. Oil commodities are traded in US dollars, and the currency’s slipping value is also causing the price per barrel to balloon.

  152. 152.

    Weenus Chumkamnerd

    June 19, 2008 at 10:22 am

    WTF is “The MUP”?

  153. 153.

    rawshark

    June 19, 2008 at 10:45 am

    Weenus Chumkamnerd Says:

    WTF is “The MUP”?

    MUP is Magical Unity Pony. I don’t know why exactly but the MUP is Obama.

  154. 154.

    liberal

    June 19, 2008 at 11:26 am

    Koz wrote,

    That’s why all the bullshit about “pristine” ANWR, six years from now, 1M bbls/day has to be seen for what it is.

    We do see it for what it is: not much.

  155. 155.

    Weenus Chumkamnerd

    June 19, 2008 at 12:17 pm

    MUP is Magical Unity Pony. I don’t know why exactly but the MUP is Obama.

    Oh, so my inference that Koz is some sort of wingnut troll (albeit one with a somewhat better grasp of the English language than the usual specimen) is confirmed.

    I guess I’ll start referring to McCain as the COF (Clueless Old Fart).

  156. 156.

    Koz

    June 19, 2008 at 12:21 pm

    Oil is the energy behind the whole fucking transport system.

    Let’s try to pay attention here Einstein.

    As oil gets more and more expensive, and battery power gets more and more practical, it will become cost imperative to migrate transport away from oil. When that happens, the electrical system has to be able to generate more power than it does now.

    Therefore, to prevent a general power crisis (like we have an oil crisis right now), we need to develop greater nuclear power capability.

  157. 157.

    binzinerator

    June 19, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Let’s try to pay attention here Einstein.

    Everything you’ve said so far tells me you ain’t. It’s clueless conclusions built from your pulled-from-your-ass premises like this

    That’s why all the bullshit about “pristine” ANWR, six years from now, 1M bbls/day has to be seen for what it is.

    And this

    Therefore, to prevent a general power crisis (like we have an oil crisis right now), we need to develop greater nuclear power capability.

    that make me wonder whether you’re a gooper concern troll or just a run-of-the-mill dippy homeschooled 17-year-old.

    Not that you couldn’t be both.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Why Chris Matthews would be bad on MTP « Later On says:
    June 18, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    […] Posted in Media at 1:12 pm by LeisureGuy Because he’s incredibly ill-informed and talks long before his brain is engaged. […]

  2. ANWR, Energy Policy, C&T (Links to your Heart’s Content) « Indistinct Union says:
    June 19, 2008 at 10:25 am

    […] As well as these quite sane remarks from John Cole: The thing is, though, if we start offshore drilling immediately, and I will throw in drilling in ANWR and anywhere else you want to drill, the price of gas is not going to drop to $2.00 a gallon. It just isn’t- oil is a fungible commodity, is restricted by our refining capacity, and so on (take note of the fact that the production of gas-guzzling SUV’s is tapering off- think there is a connection to oil prices? ). Not to mention the overseas demand in places like China and India and whatnot are going to double over the next ten years. So $2.00 gasoline is just a pipe dream, most certainly will not happen in the long term, and definitely not in the short term. […]

  3. Today’s Republi-tard myth: Drilling for oil will save us! « break the terror says:
    June 22, 2008 at 8:24 pm

    […] Today’s Republi-tard myth: Drilling for oil will save us! My god! Drilling won’t fix ANYTHING, and these facts are readily available, but the money-hungry GOP is pushing this on the American people right now because Americans just aren’t that smart, and because it’s pretty much all the Republicans have right now, and…grrrr…John Cole, rant for me: The thing is, though, if we start offshore drilling immediately, and I will throw in drilling in ANWR and anywhere else you want to drill, the price of gas is not going to drop to $2.00 a gallon. It just isn’t- oil is a fungible commodity, is restricted by our refining capacity, and so on (take note of the fact that the production of gas-guzzling SUV’s is tapering off- think there is a connection to oil prices? ). Not to mention the overseas demand in places like China and India and whatnot are going to double over the next ten years. So $2.00 gasoline is just a pipe dream, most certainly will not happen in the long term, and definitely not in the short term. […]

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - way2blue - SINALEI, SAMOA—RESPITE EDITION—FEBRUARY 2025.  (second of five) 7
Image by way2blue (7/13/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • danielx on Late Night Open Thread: Buyer’s Remorse (Jul 14, 2025 @ 1:57am)
  • Marc on Late Night Open Thread: Buyer’s Remorse (Jul 14, 2025 @ 1:51am)
  • Ohio Mom on Late Night Open Thread: Buyer’s Remorse (Jul 14, 2025 @ 1:44am)
  • Ramona on Late Night Open Thread: Buyer’s Remorse (Jul 14, 2025 @ 1:35am)
  • Ksmiami on Late Night Open Thread: Buyer’s Remorse (Jul 14, 2025 @ 1:33am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!