Topic: Will Oil Hurt Obama?
BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 09:25 AM
And as far as food goes, plant a garden, if you dont have your own access to land to do so, find a buddy that does and plant a Co-op. There are ways to circumvent what the goverment/big buisness wants to charge you for something.

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 09:33 AM
Found to be effiecient? The US Goverment has been using hydrogen since the early 70's. It works just fine for them, and besides are u gonna have somebody hold hand a wait to tell u its ok or are you gonna see c for your darn self if it works. I saw this oil crap happining 5 years ago and i wanted to do something about it, so, i found a recipie for a soybean based biofuel and started producing about 100-120 gallons a month and low and behold my car works great. I dont need some over-payed putz working for the US government telling me its ok. Ive seen it for myself



Fanta46's photo
Wed 06/18/08 11:05 AM

I think the ban should stay in place permanently and our government should be forced to go after alternative fuel sources. Our consumption of petroleum has us stuck in the dark ages, its old, outdated and extremely harmfull to the enviroment (hey sounds just like John McCain) and the idea needs to be scraped anyway so i think NOW is the perfect time. There is opprituniity in Cellulose, Hydrogen, Solar, i could go on and on. The use in Petroleum translated would be like all of Americans forced to watch movies on BETA knowing theres BLUE RAY!


I make my own bio-fuel, its really suprisingly easy


Aye, aye!!

Why destroy the environment for a temporary fix which wont even effect the price of oil for at least 5 yrs.
Lets wipe entire species out of existence because the Energy companies wont invest some of their record profits on replacing the 50% of oil we import!
Are you people crazy???

Brandon24721's photo
Wed 06/18/08 01:45 PM
i'm in the oil field... so McCain has my vote!

no photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:10 PM
Edited by Starsailor2851 on Wed 06/18/08 02:13 PM


I think the ban should stay in place permanently and our government should be forced to go after alternative fuel sources. Our consumption of petroleum has us stuck in the dark ages, its old, outdated and extremely harmfull to the enviroment (hey sounds just like John McCain) and the idea needs to be scraped anyway so i think NOW is the perfect time. There is opprituniity in Cellulose, Hydrogen, Solar, i could go on and on. The use in Petroleum translated would be like all of Americans forced to watch movies on BETA knowing theres BLUE RAY!


I make my own bio-fuel, its really suprisingly easy


Aye, aye!!

Why destroy the environment for a temporary fix


First, you are assuming it will destroy the environment, and second you are thinking it will be a temporary fix. And, then you assume it will take 5 years to effect prices.

All of those are bareless assumptions and theories based off of others who feed us propaganda based off of feel goods and environmentalists that want us to live like the 19th century. In fact, all those theories may be incredibly wrong and the opposite may be true. And, there is plenty to back that up by doing a bit of your own research on Global Cooling and the Decline of Sunspots.

If you were to watch the Democrats counter to Mccain and Bush today they're even grabbing for anything to hold onto.

For one, theories are changing on the climate issue and more are seeing a possible ice age coming. Recent studies have shown that sun spots are VERY low, this is the same activity that occurred on the Sun that caused the Little Ice Age that led to the deaths of millions from ruined crops and starvation, as well as led to bitter cold temperatures.

Second, a temporary fix? The presumed oil supply in the Green River Basin is up to a trillion barrels of oil. 800 billion is likely.

"One acre of corn produces the equivalent of 5 to 7 barrels of oil. One acre of oil shale produces 100,000 to 1 million barrels." - Senator Orrin Hatch http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/birger_shale.fortune/?postversion=2008060617

In other places we have significant reserves of oil as well. I was watching a program on CNN where they were drilling for oil in North Dakota. They were talking about how the time to drill is now because production is so high compared to before. The owner of the drill said that there would be profit, viable for drilling for oil, as long as a barrel of oil stay above $70. And, they said that drills and oil production in places like ANWR and off shore could begin in 6 months.

The Democrats today following Mccain and Bush's speech on drilling for oil said this was no quick fix, if there was drilling now it would take 6 months for production. Wait a minute, only 6 months to drill and to begin tapping? That's not like at all!

DRILL NOW, and build more REFINERIES NOW or allow the majority of Americans to continue to suffer from high gas prices.

And, do NOT block the tapping of the huge domestic natural gas reserves we've found.

Drilling today DOES NOT hurt the environment. It is simple and easy to do, we can even drill under the ground horizontally for hundreds of miles so the real impact is so far below the surface of the Earth that know one will even know.

In Alaska the overwhelming majority are FOR drilling.

The Alaska Pipeline did not hurt the caribou, in fact they move right around the pipeline like its a natural thing and even sleep and rest near it.

The story we are always told that drilling and pipelines destroy and damage the natural environment and harm animals is a LIE.

Johncenawlife316's photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:13 PM
I don't think this will hurt Obama on any of this for one, secondly all Obama is trying to get at is Energy companies need to take some if not all of there money in making better cars that doesn't need to run off of oil or gas etc.

Now surely this would hurt the oil and gas companys because more and more people will switch over to save money on gas and oil etc, this is called going " GREEN " saving the earth and so much more.

lifestooshort6's photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:29 PM

McCain already has my vote and YES the ban should be lifted. If we have our own resources then why should we not be allowed to use them.. that's just pure stupidity not to do so!!

the United States has their resources, sure, but they insist on dominating ALL the oil globallygrumble

no photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:30 PM


McCain already has my vote and YES the ban should be lifted. If we have our own resources then why should we not be allowed to use them.. that's just pure stupidity not to do so!!

the United States has their resources, sure, but they insist on dominating ALL the oil globallygrumble


Prove it.

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:40 PM
Does the Exon-valdez oil disaster of 1989 in Prince William Sound ring a bell? Ill be damned if anyone will destroy my home (earth) over the all mighty dollor. Theres that barabaric way of thinking again lol

no photo
Wed 06/18/08 02:57 PM

Does the Exon-valdez oil disaster of 1989 in Prince William Sound ring a bell? Ill be damned if anyone will destroy my home (earth) over the all mighty dollor. Theres that barabaric way of thinking again lol


And, how many of those have happened recently? What percentage are disasters to non-disasters?

Volcanoes produce many more times over more pollution than any oil disaster ever could. Hurricanes as well with all the devastation and pollution that occurs because of them.

Call me a barbarian all you want, but to think that we puny humans can have any real impact that this mighty Earth cannot fix or control is ridiculous. One lightning bolt, one hurricane, one volcano eruption, one earthquake put us all in our true place. Mere pests, the Earth controls us, not the other way around. We are held by its leash, we are the controlled creatures of this mighty world.

It is a world of self correction and balance, and even it is not the most powerful being, the Sun runs us all, with a slight change in any aspect and our lives will be turned upside down.

Hurricane Katrina and Rita destroyed 109 Oil Platforms in the Gulf and there was NO significant contamination of the Gulf of Mexico. Our technology is far superior today.

Call me a barbarian all you want, but it is types like you that want to strangle the average American to take on inefficient modes of energy and "sacrifice for future" meaning we all must suffer for some nostalgic feel good ideas.

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 05:37 PM
Im just teasin about the whole barbarian thing, the point is it happpend and if the we are still out there messing with this out dated crap its bound to happen again. We dont need oil what soever, people survived before plastic was invented, and it is way outdated as a fuel source. Get rid of it permanently

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 05:39 PM
We are already in the grasps of what could rival the great depression over the cost of crude oil as it is, so why not get off the tit so to speak and find a way to survive with out it?

willy_cents's photo
Wed 06/18/08 06:01 PM
Edited by willy_cents on Wed 06/18/08 06:04 PM
ooooooooooooookay....in order to drive hydrogen based cars, we need to manufacture hydrogen, the most explosive element in the periodic table. So, let us build the plant in Bethany, Okla. sufficient to supply the needs of the central one third of the nation (remember the Hindenberg?) Then, let's truck it all over the US and put it in tanks on every street corner. Of course, that will require federal mandate because storage of liquid hydrogen is banned in most cities and towns in the US. Better yet, lets go back to the lifesyle of the 18th century. Raise your own food or starve. How many ppl can all the gardens in Okla City support if they each raise a garden. And kiss off your jobs. Not much demand for construction or computer usage if there is no electricity. Sounds to me like someone who has a fantasy about their own abilities and agenda.



aqs for will it hurt Obama, heck no, just listen to the media....dems will vote democrat no matter who they run. If the dems ran Robert Mugabe, he would still get 45% of the vote...lol

Fanta46's photo
Wed 06/18/08 06:59 PM



I think the ban should stay in place permanently and our government should be forced to go after alternative fuel sources. Our consumption of petroleum has us stuck in the dark ages, its old, outdated and extremely harmfull to the enviroment (hey sounds just like John McCain) and the idea needs to be scraped anyway so i think NOW is the perfect time. There is opprituniity in Cellulose, Hydrogen, Solar, i could go on and on. The use in Petroleum translated would be like all of Americans forced to watch movies on BETA knowing theres BLUE RAY!


I make my own bio-fuel, its really suprisingly easy


Aye, aye!!

Why destroy the environment for a temporary fix


First, you are assuming it will destroy the environment, and second you are thinking it will be a temporary fix. And, then you assume it will take 5 years to effect prices.

All of those are bareless assumptions and theories based off of others who feed us propaganda based off of feel goods and environmentalists that want us to live like the 19th century. In fact, all those theories may be incredibly wrong and the opposite may be true. And, there is plenty to back that up by doing a bit of your own research on Global Cooling and the Decline of Sunspots.

If you were to watch the Democrats counter to Mccain and Bush today they're even grabbing for anything to hold onto.

For one, theories are changing on the climate issue and more are seeing a possible ice age coming. Recent studies have shown that sun spots are VERY low, this is the same activity that occurred on the Sun that caused the Little Ice Age that led to the deaths of millions from ruined crops and starvation, as well as led to bitter cold temperatures.

Second, a temporary fix? The presumed oil supply in the Green River Basin is up to a trillion barrels of oil. 800 billion is likely.

"One acre of corn produces the equivalent of 5 to 7 barrels of oil. One acre of oil shale produces 100,000 to 1 million barrels." - Senator Orrin Hatch http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/birger_shale.fortune/?postversion=2008060617

In other places we have significant reserves of oil as well. I was watching a program on CNN where they were drilling for oil in North Dakota. They were talking about how the time to drill is now because production is so high compared to before. The owner of the drill said that there would be profit, viable for drilling for oil, as long as a barrel of oil stay above $70. And, they said that drills and oil production in places like ANWR and off shore could begin in 6 months.

The Democrats today following Mccain and Bush's speech on drilling for oil said this was no quick fix, if there was drilling now it would take 6 months for production. Wait a minute, only 6 months to drill and to begin tapping? That's not like at all!

DRILL NOW, and build more REFINERIES NOW or allow the majority of Americans to continue to suffer from high gas prices.

And, do NOT block the tapping of the huge domestic natural gas reserves we've found.

Drilling today DOES NOT hurt the environment. It is simple and easy to do, we can even drill under the ground horizontally for hundreds of miles so the real impact is so far below the surface of the Earth that know one will even know.

In Alaska the overwhelming majority are FOR drilling.

The Alaska Pipeline did not hurt the caribou, in fact they move right around the pipeline like its a natural thing and even sleep and rest near it.

The story we are always told that drilling and pipelines destroy and damage the natural environment and harm animals is a LIE.


First of all those aren't assumptions. They are facts coming from the experts.
The environmental impact is well known. That's why there has been a ban on it for so long. The idiots who want the temporary fix just figure they have a new, young bunch of groupies who cant remember the effects of offshore oil drilling, or why the ban has been in place since before they were born.
The oil would only be a temporary fix, it wouldn't hit the market for 5 yrs, and while destroying ecosystems and whole species of Marine creatures will only distract from the need for a replacement for crude oil!

Fanta46's photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:06 PM

ooooooooooooookay....in order to drive hydrogen based cars, we need to manufacture hydrogen, the most explosive element in the periodic table. So, let us build the plant in Bethany, Okla. sufficient to supply the needs of the central one third of the nation (remember the Hindenberg?) Then, let's truck it all over the US and put it in tanks on every street corner. Of course, that will require federal mandate because storage of liquid hydrogen is banned in most cities and towns in the US. Better yet, lets go back to the lifesyle of the 18th century. Raise your own food or starve. How many ppl can all the gardens in Okla City support if they each raise a garden. And kiss off your jobs. Not much demand for construction or computer usage if there is no electricity. Sounds to me like someone who has a fantasy about their own abilities and agenda.



aqs for will it hurt Obama, heck no, just listen to the media....dems will vote democrat no matter who they run. If the dems ran Robert Mugabe, he would still get 45% of the vote...lol


You really should read up on hydrogen fueled vehicles.
Hydrogen is two parts of three in water. All you have to do is boil it, and separate the elements. There are models of vehicles that complete the process right in the car.
There are models that use a little hydrogen to power an electric generator which powers the vehicle. There are models that are powered on hydrogen alone, and there are safe efficient storage methods for hydrogen in a solid wafer. Both in the vehicle and at the station.
There are also, my last count, 17 hydrogen filling stations in America. Probably more than that now

Fanta46's photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:15 PM
Edited by Fanta46 on Wed 06/18/08 07:16 PM
MIAMI _ John McCain's support for offshore drilling could hurt his prospects in the nation's largest battleground state, where voters have long favored safeguarding Florida's economically and environmentally precious coastline.

In a sign of the issue's volatility, several high-profile Florida Republicans in Tallahassee and Washington broke with their party's presumptive presidential nominee.

For anyone to represent that someone drilling off the coast in Florida is going to lower gas prices here or anywhere in this country is disingenuous and a flawed argument," said Republican House Speaker Marco Rubio, who added that he supports drilling off Florida's coast if it can be done safely.

"Oil drilling could take 10 years before any oil is pulled out of the ground
(Assume 10 yrs sailor, and never lowering oil prices)


and there are a large number of leases held by oil companies that are not being exploited now. We can't say we need more until we've exploited those."

And look thats a Republican saying that!!noway

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:17 PM
Fanta, good job, im glad we see eye to eye

no photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:18 PM

We dont need oil what soever, people survived before plastic was invented


That is ridiculous. Yeah, people survived without computers, microchips, cheaper advanced television sets, and gosh so many other things as well. Give up oil and give up computers. Go for it, but don't subjugate everyone else to pre-modern era technology. Oh yeah, and I'll see you on the highway in my steel car...lol.

Fanta46's photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:19 PM
Look more Republicans!!

"McCain is obviously taking a chance, given that he's trying to run as Republican who is environmentally friendly," warned Quinnipiac pollster Peter Brown.

McCain began airing an ad on cable this week that portrays him as an environmentalist who "stood up to" Bush on global warming. The ad, which is running in Florida, features McCain standing against a scenic mountain view wearing a khaki shirt and baseball cap.

But oil drilling is the second environmental issue in recent weeks on which McCain has sided with Bush and parted with most of Florida's political establishment.

During his visit to the Everglades earlier this month, McCain defended his opposition to $2 billion for Everglades restoration, arguing that the overall $23 billion package included wasteful spending. Most Florida Republicans _ including Martinez and Crist _ supported overriding Bush's veto of the legislation.

U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Miami, a leading McCain supporter who faces her first significant re-election challenge, on Wednesday repeated her support for the drilling moratorium. So did Rep. Vern Buchanan of Sarasota, Fla., who's running against a Democratic rival he narrowly beat in 2006.

"We must continue to protect and preserve our economic interests by safeguarding against near-shore drilling," Ros-Lehtinen said.

Ray Sansom, the incoming leader of the Florida House, told reporters in Tallahassee that he's opposed to drilling off Florida's coast. Another GOP leader even challenged McCain's assertion that drilling would increase the oil supply and lower gas prices.


The question here should be,
Will drilling for oil off our coasts hurt McCain?

BrandonJItaliano's photo
Wed 06/18/08 07:21 PM
Your already living with Pre-modern Technology while your drivin that car using Petroleum fuel. I have two steel cars and ill see wholl survive the auto accident lol