It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democrats vote NO to lower gas prices

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by sos37

YAY! More blue/red, divisive, ridiculous, non- solution crap so many people seem to love despite the fact that it does absolutely nothing but idiotically simplify complex ideas (The Economy and The Oil Crisis) and assign a false target (Democrats) to blame.

What unmitigated crap.

First off, people need to realize that the Oil Market, much like the Diamond Market, uses the illusion of scarcity. This scarcity is entirely artificial and is dictated by the Companies themselves. For instance, there are numerous examples of Oil Companies actually shutting down high-profit refineries to keep demand high. If you find this unbelievable go here: and see the actual memos from Mobil, Chevron, and Texaco. This was back in 2005! Just as there are, literally, tons of diamonds sitting around in warehouses around the world to keep demand high (diamonds are not rare, contrary to popular belief), oil companies regularly cap wells, ramp down refineries and engage in price fixing on a regular basis. It is completely artificial market where a very few set and drive the price ( ). Even The Saudis think the prices here are absurd and have nothing to do with supply and demand.

Moving on to the second point: People keep talking about the price of oil going up, but that's just not so.The price of oil has remained fairly steady, but the dollar has declined HUGELY. If you were able to pay for gas in gold, you would be paying about the same price you paid in the seventies! ( ).

The problem is NOT the Dems/Repubs/immigrants/Dubai/ Middle Eastern oil, or any one of 1,000 other "boogeymen"s we have been led to believe by the same idiots who, because of their shared ideology of American Hegemony ( ), lied us into a completely unnecessary war and are attempting to lie us into another. The problem is Big Oil's unaccountable greed combined with a fiat money system wherein the founders of both, who are the same people, are the only ones that benefit.

Central Bankers conspiracy?

You bet.

I got another idiotic email about an oil boycott. A boycott of the oil companies is another short term non-solution that would accomplish nothing. Did I mention that BP made $12 BILLION dollars in the last few months? Let's pretend for a moment that the citizenry of the entire WORLD boycotted ALL gasoline for a month. The oil companies would smile, say, "No demand.", shut down drilling, mothball more refineries and keep the price where it is, if not drive it higher.

In truth, we are facing a decision made by "the elite" at Bilderberg in 2005 (don't get me started) wherein the stated goal was to double the price of oil over 12-24 months. That goal was easily reached and now the goal is $150 a barrel
( ) which, at the rate we're going, will happen this summer! In the words of Paul Joseph Watson, "The global elite are conspiring to send oil prices crashing through the $200 dollar a barrel mark as part of an organized agenda to hike profits, bring about a global economic crash and torpedo the middle class, and they're not afraid to attack Iran as a means of achieving their goal." ( )

I couldn't agree more.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:21 AM
The federal gas tax and the windfall profits tax were both bad ideas, especially the windfall profits tax. The only winner in that deal would have been the Democrats. The reason I say that is because they pushed so hard for the legislation and the Republicans defeated it.

Tax the Oil companies.
Tax money goes to the government. $$$
Oil companies raise gas prices to compensate.
Consumers pay more at the pump. More money at the pump = more federal tax paid on gas which means more money goes to the government $$$

I still can't help but wonder though why is it the Democrats continually thwart efforts for us to find and drill our own oil. Check this story out:

And I think a lot of people here are ignoring Boone870's post that has a lot of interesting facts to present. You can't explain this away either.

Congressman Roy Blunt put together these data to highlight the differences between House Republicans and House Democrats on energy policy:

ANWR Exploration House Republicans: 91% Supported House Democrats: 86% Opposed
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 78% Opposed

Oil Shale Exploration
House Republicans: 90% Supported
House Democrats: 86% Opposed

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration
House Republicans: 81% Supported
House Democrats: 83% Opposed

Refinery Increased Capacity
House Republicans: 97% Supported
House Democrats: 96% Opposed


91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas.

86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by argile2000

It's ok, no worries, other than side steering the topic, but I felt I at least should reply. I grew up in more of a conservative type of family, and was conservative as well, until I began to do my own research and learn that much of the "doctrine" as it were, was often based on non-factual information or mis interpreted data. I found the libertarian ideology to be even more extreme in the right wing direction than conservativism in many ways, and so for a very long time now, have found my views match very closely to what people here in the usa would label as "liberal", not exactly on ALL issues, but pretty close. Honestly I would use the "closed" label to more represent the conservative, or "reactionary" ideology, as the term "liberal" really has an entirely different more "open" definition. I support issues that benefit "the people" much more, and I found my previous view points when all is said and done, benefit the smaller percentage of people who own most of the resources rather than the bulk of the population including the middle class who are at this point struggling even for existence.

For example, I happen to have Rush Limbaugh on right now, and I've been listening for about 30 minutes, and believe me, that's 30 minutes way to long, and he is going on about why oil speculators are good...uh huh that's right, he is trying to convince his listeners that what we see going on right now is good...I find just about everything coming from him and the minions of right wingers in the media so full of crap and literally regurgitating the daily GOP talking points...the entire reason speculators have driven the prices up so high on gas is because of republican supported legislation that deregulated the market in the first place and so now he's on the radio spouting off a bunch of propaganda to convince us the result is actually good!
We obviously disagree. I believe infrastructure items, such as energy, should be regulated and definately speculation on futures...

Anyway, I can imagine how many will read this and want badly to reply and start a discussion on ideology alone, however, it's meant only as singular reply to your post and I want to thank you for being polite. Discussion of differing ideology is perhaps, one of the absolute most difficult, and often emotional topics to even begin to approach, and you did it well and in a very non-offensive matter.

[edit on 13-6-2008 by skyshow]

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:52 AM

Originally posted by RaDios

Adding to this...if alternative fuels were a viable option, don't you think the oil providers would lower their prices in an effort to be competative?

Logic would state yes. However, I'll tell you why this is a BIG NO! Because the oil industry was a 3 trillion dollar industry just 18 months ago. I guess I could find out how much it is not but I'll tell you that 3 trillion is low.

Now, why would they want to be 'competitive' when they are the only kid on the block right now? They have had a history of buying out almost every single 'alternative energy' option that is created. Viable ones of course. Why do you think the 'electric car' went away? Because it was a flawed technology? Nope. That is corporate spin in order to cover up the real reason.

There are alternative energy sources brought out all of the time but right now this business is going to squeeze every single penny that they can while they are the big kid on the block.

Your thought is a good one. But see, that's the problem. It's 'good'. Corporate money is not based on what is 'good' for people. It is based on what is good for the bottom line. They know their industry is eventually doomed so they are piling up as much cash as possible. Plain and simple. Screw the people that HAVE to keep using their product because they KNOW we are addicted and dependent.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 11:57 AM

Originally posted by skyshow
I…was conservative as well, untill I began to do my own research and learn that much of the "doctrine" as it were, was bogus based on non-factual information..Honestly I would use the "closed" label to more represent the conservative, or "reactionary" ideology, as the term "liberal" really has an entirely different more "open" definition.

The problem is if you think the Liberals/Democrats in Congress aren’t getting rich off you, you’d better think again.

Al Gore and John Edwards are making oodles off this whole energy “crisis”. A crisis they helped create. That’s where the real war is: the Liberals/Democrats want to make money by stifling corporations and selling you carbon credits and green “solutions”. The Conservatives/Republicans want to hand you over to the corporations so they can make you work for the company store. It’s like being caught in a neighborhood with two warring gangs. You can vote Red or Blue, Crips or Bloods, but don’t believe that either group has your best interests at heart. They’re all about making money for themselves at your expense. Vote Libertarian.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:05 PM
reply to post by RaDios

if alternative fuels were a viable option, don't you think the oil providers would lower their prices in an effort to be competative?

So you draw the conclusion that alternative energy is not a viable option because oil providers have not lowered prices?

Oil is traded on a free market. It is the market that controls the price based on the speculation of many factors including percieved future supply and demand.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:10 PM
reply to post by passenger

It is ridiculus that the large majority have cars out there are running on one type of energy. I haven't seen anyone purpose an overnight shift to one type of fuel as your post suggest. Why not integrate cars that use alternative fuel into the market. Why has this turned into a debate of which one energy needs to be chossen?

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:13 PM

Originally posted by sos37
Today a House subcommittee voted against a Republican-led measure that would have led to drilling 50 to 100 miles offshore. This could have led to lower gas prices and is in conjunction with the U.S. Geological Survey's Oil and Gas Assessment that there are hundreds of billions of barrels of oil under our own land and shores.

Your car runs on crude? Mine doesn't.

The prices at the pump are not a result of lack of supply of crude. The prices are what they are at the pump because the oil industry is a colluded market that limits its own production at refineries in order to artificially inflate prices.

You may have noticed that, while prices are high, pretty much every gas station has full tanks. If there were a shortage, this would not be the case.

So the end result? We have an oil exploratory branch of the oil baron government, with oil workers manning the seats, telling us they can find LOTS more of what we already have too much of, that htey won't refine any faster, if only we relax environmental standards to let them build and explore offshore.

The democrats didn't vote no to lower gas prices. They voted no on having your tax dollars subsidize getting more product to the oil companties that are going to gouge you for it ANYWAY.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:15 PM
reply to post by stinkhorn

My friend you need to start thinking for yourself and not regurgitate what you hear you should be thinking. I have seen almost no post saying we should not continue drilling. What people are saying is we should not continue to accept oil as the only viable option. We have a camera on mars, we have seen millions of light years in space, but we can't figure out how to use anything but oil. Does that make sense to you? It dosn't to me...

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:17 PM
reply to post by passenger

I got a good chuckle on this one. Carbon credits are not responsible for the recent run-up in fuel costs. I'm still laughing here at my desk on that one, oh and that the previous two democratic candidates for President are the ones getting filthy rich off of this.

It's always amazing the memes coming out of right-wingerville. Particularly, lately. It's becoming more rediculous and obsurd with each passing day.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by skyshow
I got a good chuckle on this one. It's always amazing the memes coming out of right-wingerville. Particularly, lately. It's becoming more rediculous and obsurd with each passing day.

You really need to do some research on your candidates of choice. Haven’t you EVER wondered how Gore and Edwards got so rich? OK. Let’s say you’re right – they didn’t get rich (or richer) off of green promotion. Then how did they get so much? By doing business with the very evil corporations that you’re so opposed to? Think that’s it maybe? So which is worse?
They certainly didn’t make it by growing their own fair-trade, organically grown crops to give to the poor. Keep laughing. And Gore and Edwards will keep laughing while they fly around in their private jets meeting with the very people you despise and making tons of money screwing you. And you laugh while they do it…

P.S. You made a terrible error in locating me in “right-wingerville”. You made a fallacious assumption based on my agreement with one point that most Republicans are trying to make. That doesn’t make me a right-winger. Funny how Liberals don’t like labeling people or discriminating but then are quite happy to dismiss someone they don’t like by immediately labeling them as “right-winger” as if that dismisses everything they say.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:30 PM
I don't think the OP's title is misleading in any way.

The Dems are holding off on any major bills going through until one of theirs occupies the White House.

BDS is so prevalent in the current democratic law makers, they have decided to harm the people who elected them in order to "prove their point" about Bush.

If Obama gets in, this bill will pass in .238 seconds. Then we could all begin our bows in unison to the great prophet of change and hope. You see, they'll be no mention of this failed committee bill if Obama's running the show. It will be lauded as a remarkable achievment for the freshman President.

note: BDS = Bush Derangement Syndrome.


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 01:19 PM
reply to post by S1LV3R4D0

Are you serious? In order to synthesize anything you must start with the raw materials. In the example of cloning, you are starting with a cell. You are not CREATING that cell. What you're asking for is like asking to create oil out of thin air. That is not the way synthetic technologies work. Not to mention the billions of dollars that would be need to fund synthetic research.

Secondly, since raw materials would have to be used, mixed, heated and compressed to generate a synthetic, usable product, you end up using a lot more energy just to create that product than the energy you would gain. The net energy gain is negative. So there is no advantage. The simplest, most cost effective solution is to use the resources that are already in place. Hence, drilling is the answer.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 09:13 PM

Originally posted by RRconservative
The huge thing I want to add is Democrats won't let us drill 50 miles offshore of Florida, but it is perfectly OK for China to drill their. They have been doing it for 2 years.

Turns out that is a bit of a whopper "Vice President Dick Cheney's office acknowledged on Thursday that he was mistaken when he asserted that China, at Cuba's behest, is drilling for oil in waters 60 miles from the Florida coast."

Now how does that affect your argument?

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 09:56 PM
reply to post by sos37

The democrats want a deep and dark recession that will last
until November 2008.
People would be desperate for .......oh what's the word........
ummmm......................oh yeah....CHANGE.

A first grader could figure this one out.

[edit on 13-6-2008 by Eurisko2012]

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 03:14 PM
Who said these government votes have anything to do with gas prices?

What if the Feds are intentionally keeping as much oil in the ground as possible? So when the real oil crisis hits and there's nothing to import, the Feds can declare some sort of emergency and seize it all "for defending freedom" etc?

Guaranteed that we'll be all walking before Air Force One isn't flying. Regardless of who's president.

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 11:15 PM

Originally posted by harvib
I think it's pretty obvious. Continue to pretend like it's a partsian issue and that there is low supply and thereby justify soaring gas prices... While we all sit and debate which politicians to blame the oil companies continue to bring make record profits off our distractions and ignorance.

Yes the common American is ignorant. I'm sorry too say. But count me out as one of them. I really wish WE has a people would wake the crap up, and stop watching American idol and trash like that.

posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 08:33 PM
reply to post by sos37

As was stated in another post, Exxon Mobil just reported the largest profit ever. Not that I am big on evironmental issues, but why drill more oil when the gas companies will just gouge us on that oil, too? There are lots of alternatives: electric cars, wind power, water-run cars, etc.
Not to preach doom and gloom, but if the world as we know it ever "ends" I don't want to be stuck with a car dependent upon gas.
Another option is walking or bicycling. I realize some people have several hours to commute, but for those of us who don't, ALASKA has the highest percentage of people who walk to work everyday. Just some food for thought...

posted on Jul, 28 2008 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

Congress YOU really need to read this. All America has, but you just seem to be out of the loop and ARE NOT in the same zone as the REST OF AMERICA.

So why don’t your staff look into the web site and you should also. STOP KILLING AMERICA!

The Truth About Crude Oil

First Crude Oil is NOT from Dino the Dinosaur or his brothers. Logically speaking if the earth was covered with a dense primeval forest and there was a Dinosaur living in every five square mile area on the face of the earth, and all this was compressed into a sub surface space for tens of thousands of years, and produced a pool of Crude Oil, it WOULD ONLY FEED the needs of this world for the PAST twenty years, so WHAT FUELED the Industrial Age for the first EIGHTY YEARS???????????????????????????

Think about what is stated above! Science states that oil is the by product of the earths ENGINE as it rotates creating GRAVITY and super heating rock formations, that through this process release oil and this oil flows into cavities within the earth.

Now with this said, what is the reason for the excessive spike in Crude and Natural Gas prices? GREED.
In the 60’s gas sold for 35 cents a gallon, cars got 5 to 7 MPG so a 100 mile trip would take some 16 gallons at a cost of 5 dollars. Today cars get 30 miles to a gallon and that same trip would only take 3 gallons of gas at a cost of 12 dollars. Take into account the LOSS OF VALUE of the FRN and you will see that BIG OIL is KEEPING ITS bottom line HIGH as the efficiency of the engines increase.

There was a contrived oil crisis in the 70’s and there is one today. Why? It is the GREED of BIG OIL! It takes less than 20 dollars to get oil out of the ground and refined into its product and delivered. It takes from 6 months to a year for a well from the day the drill head starts the hole until it produce oil. The Russians can do it in three mounts. Today’s wells exceed 6000 barrels a day, and one off shore platform can have over 20 SLANT WELL HEADS producing oil 24 hours a day.

The United States of America is sitting on the worlds largest coal reserves; it also has more crude oil than the Middle East. Recent finds in Montana exceed what is found in Saudi Arabia, and Pennsylvania has over 3 trillion cubic feet of Natural Gas yet to be pumped into the system. Alaska has extensive reserves yet CONGRESS has for years REFUSED to allow the release of this oil, because of RED TAPE and that they are under the control of ENVIRONMENTALIST groups. These groups want all Americans to ride bikes and live as the settlers did in the 1800. Congress continues to LIE regarding the time it takes to drill a well and get the oil into the system. They state that it would be ten years before wells drilled today could produce oil. This is a BOLD FACE LIE. Congress has prohibited drilling for the past two decades, if what they say is true and if they allowed drilling decades ago we would NOT HAVE FOUR DOLLAR A GALLON GAS PRICES, and HOME HEATING OIL WOULD NOT BE OVER FOUR DOLLARS A GALLON, THAT WILL CAUSE A HEATING CRISIS THIS WINTER, and SOME AMERICAN MAY FREEZE TO DEATH FOR LACK OF HEAT. CONGRESS IS TO BLAME IF THIS OCCURS.

Today’s advances in drilling insure a protected environment. The WILD CAT wells of the early 1900 are a thing of the past.

Environmentalist claim that the exhaust of power plants create TONS of CO2, HOWEVER, CO2 is a GAS and is measured in cubic feet NOT TONS. The advance scrubbing of the exhausts prevent most hydrocarbons from being suspended in the atmosphere. Most ALL the reasons given by environmentalist are not science, but an agenda to deprive Americans of their standard of living.

For MORE INFORMATION of the Truth About Big Oil visit

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in