Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 85

• 0%

  ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

  " McCain was against Mr Bush's tax cuts before he was for them, and now he is in favor of offshore drilling after he was against it.

  A former POW who was tortured in Vietnam, McCain has long called for Guantán­amo to be closed and for torture to be banned. But last week he criticized the SCOTUS for 'one of the worst decisions in the history of this country' after it ruled that detainees should be allowed to challenge their detentions in US courts.

  Until recently McCain was considered a moderate, having been part of the 'Gang of 14' that secured a bipartisan compromise over judicial nominations in the Senate 3 years ago. But recently he has stressed his commitment to nominate conservative judges â;; raising the possibility that the Supreme Court would tilt decisively to the right.

  If Senator McCain continues to try to appeal to the base and to the centre simultaneously in this way, then his straight-talk brand is going to suffer."

  Reply

  10 Replies

  • 0%

    GWHayduke3 months, 3 weeks ago

    Its cool to be anti-environmental, like, counterculture edgy, dig?

    More pandering to a non-issue by a desperate man. Problem is, judging from some threads here, the 20%ers are buying it despite the completely false premise that Alaskan drilling would resolve ANY problem.

    Reply

    8 Replies

    • 0%

      JoseMadre3 months, 3 weeks ago

      And you zombies are buying "Eugene Debs" Obama hook, line, and sinker.

      Reply

      5 Replies

      • 0%

        CRYMTYPHON3 months, 3 weeks ago

        zombies... want brains, brains...

        so we are going with the smart new guy.

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Teech3 months, 3 weeks ago

          That doddering, lying, senile, drooling little son of a Bush is running ads in California condemning any who would "romanticize war" and stating that "I hate war."

          "I'm John McCain and I'm running for President."

          Unbelievable, but true. Will this Republi-con nightmare never end!

          Reply

          3 Replies

          • 0%

            tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

            Teech - Your oh so kind way of describing McCain and conservatives is the epitome of why libs will never change one vote from him to Obama and also why intelligent discussion is rare here on propeller. At close to his age, I should be so energetic and knowledgeable as McCain. However I am easily as knowledgeable as Obama.

            Reply

            2 Replies

            • 0%

              ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

              TIRED:

              "At close to his age, I should be so energetic and knowledgeable as McCain. However I am easily as knowledgeable as Obama."

              LOL. I HIGHLY doubt that.

              McCain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class and possesses only a bachelor's degree. Obama holds both a bachelor's and terminal degree, graduated with honors from Columbia and Harvard, was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, and taught Constitution Law at the U of Chicago.

              I'll take Obama's Columbia and Harvard-trained wit over your feeble mind ANY day of the week.

              LOL.

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
    • 0%

      Blackacereturn3 months, 3 weeks ago

      I really do think that all Obama needs to do is stand still and let this guy do himself in!

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        Blackacereturn3 months, 3 weeks ago

        How is he flip flopping if he said one thing and his aids say another. I thought flip flopping comes when the same person say two different things on the same subject. Which makes McCain a flip flopper!

        Reply
  • 0%

    libsRfunny3 months, 3 weeks ago

    A lot has changed in eight years. You can't buy gas for less than a buck anymnore, and home heating costs are going through the proverbial roof.

    Only an idiot like Obama would stand in the way of more drilling.

    As for flip-flopping, Obama is as bad as they get -- telling one audience he's against NAFTA while his aids are in Canada saying the opposite.

    More recently, he was in favor of town-hall debates until his handlers yanked his leash and said "No."

    Reply
• 0%

  CRYMTYPHON3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Why is it 'flip-flop'?

  After someone has flipped, then floppped, they should flop to get back to a flip position, shouldn't they? Or does it toggle?

  To be safe I propose a Propeller equal allotment of flip-flop and flop-flip usage.

  As for poor Mr. McCain, he is only reaping the harvest of compromise; once a man who stood on principle, he sold out; now he can no longer determine where he is, or was, or needs to be.

  Reply
• 0%

  not2needy3 months, 3 weeks ago

  McCain doesn't seem to comprehend that what he says from one group to another is verifiable and can be used against him tomorrow, or this evening. We've already had one president that didn't remember what day it was, i don't want to go there again, this country is in such bad shape i don't think we could stand it. HOWEVER, Bush and Cheney plan to still be running the country by proxy if McCain is elected, he has already shown how intimidated he is by them.

  Reply
• 0%

  TheRealizer3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Who ever assumes the position of the chief executive of the United States will preside over a nation that is but a shell of the Industrial powerhouse it once was. We are reduced to beggar stutus on the world stage, We owe China

  1.3 TRILLION dollars. The U S is for sale!!!!!!

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • ML2007Comment removed: User banned.
  • 0%

    Blackacereturn3 months, 3 weeks ago

    For sale, it has been sold they are just trying to sell the last remaining vestiges of our once grate nation. What hurts is that they do this in the name of patriotism and love for this country...these are the worse of American in history!

    Reply
• 0%

  aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

  There is a lot of flip flopping going on about domestic drilling. I wouldn't go along when gas was $2. or $3 dollars a gallon, but now it is $4. and on its way to $10. and domestic drilling looks like a good idea. In fact from recent polls, it is the 08 Election winning issue.

  Reply

  35 Replies

  • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.22 Replies

    • 0%

      aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

      In 1995 the Republican Senate sent the Hillbilly *hore Hopper a bill to increase domestic drilling. If he had not vetoed that bill we would not be dependent on M E oil crooks. We would have had our own oil 3 years ago. In an emergency we can put our new oil on the line in three years. In November when gas is $8. a gallon Americans will run, not walk to the polls to vote out Democrats standing in the way of domestic drilling. Actually, JQP it is National Security, and Democrats don't have a clue about either.

      Reply

      21 Replies

      • 0%

        bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

        We have been dependent on "M E oil crooks" for DECADES. Again - whether or not any oil is sucked out of U.S. soil will have LITTLE impact on the price of oil. The energy department run by your favorite Republican administration recently concluded that the savings would only be around 75 cents a barrel.

        And your favorite President is BIG BUDDIES with those "M E oil crooks", so you need to ask him to ask them to cut us a break.

        Any domestic drilling will be of LITTLE value - we need to pursue ALTERNATE energy sources NOW - it is that pursuit that the politicians keep PUTTING OFF.

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • 0%

          aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

          There is no alternative energy source, but we can dig, and search for one if that will make you happy. Three months ago maybe 35% to 40% of Americans wanted to dig here, now today, 61% want to did here. It is the issue for the 08 election, and the Democrats are clearly on the wrong side. They are talking about Nationalizing our Refineries. Can you say Marxist? We don't need a Hugo Chevez wannabe in the Oval Office.

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

            There are PLENTY of alternative energy sources - solar and wind JUST for starters!

            The PRICE of oil is an issue, for sure. Whether or not to drill in any of the U.S. is not such a big issue as YOU would like it to be.

            Republicans are on the side of the OIL COMPANY EXECUTIVES and will do whatever lines the pockets of those execs, their stockholders, and the politicians themselves.

            SOME of the Democrats are trying to use some sense and are trying to keep us from destroying our plant JUST get our hands on a BIT more oil.

            Can YOU say SHORT-SIGHTED????

            Reply

          • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

            • 0%

              simonsez3 months, 3 weeks ago

              So ... you're going to hook up a sail or a windmill on your car?

              Reply

              1 Reply

              • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
      • 0%

        Lurch3 months, 3 weeks ago

        Ani, besides your assumptions being incorrect, it goes back way past that.

        First, the assumptions:

        If the US had opened up all parks and shorelines, not only would the oil industry have made several disasters by now (that would have cost more than any oil savings to consumers/taxpayers), but OPEC and the speculators would have accounted for that and turned down their production oooh, about 0.6% and we would still be in this situation. Only the oil execs would be making $50M/yr instead of $45M.

        The history:

        Also, you have to go back to 1981 to find the real culprit. Carter created the US alternative energy initiative in the 1970s because he knew it was a matter of national defense. Cut & Ronnie Reagan surrendered to the oil industry and canceled that program. Thereby guaranteeing the 9/11, the oil wars, and the mess we are in today.

        Reply

      • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.13 Replies

        • 0%

          tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

          JohnQ & bubba2: - The two of you have been reading/listening to too many liberal blogs/talk. Please take econ 101 and realize each incremental increase in our own oil production helps and time is necessary to bring it on line. Just saying we will drill in ANWR and off shore, and being serious about it, will help drive prices down. Commodity speculation is just that and the psychological component is significant. Alternative energy takes much time to develop to the point of being competitive. I know you won't power your house with solar unless you are rich and don't care about cost. Just try putting a wind farm near Kerry, Gore or Kennnedy's house. It won't happen.

          Reply

          12 Replies

          • 0%

            ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

            TIRED:

            "Please take econ 101 and realize each incremental increase in our own oil production helps and time is necessary to bring it on line."

            That's only true if short supply is the most significant factor driving oil prices up (it's not) and if oil drilled in the U.S. is guaranteed to be sold and consumed in the U.S. (it's not).

            You seem to be forgetting that:

            1) U.S. oil consumption is growing and it would take 10-15 years to develop the infrastructure to mine ANWR. By that time, rising U.S. oil consumption would far outpace additional oil output ANWR.

            2) Demand from emerging economies, particularly China and India, is growing exponentially and will outpace the modest rise in oil output from ANWR, the Dakotas, and Gulf of Mexico.

            3) Due to the weak dollar, oil companies actually make more profit by selling oil to Europe and its strong Euro. Increased oil production would not necessarily make it to the U.S.; it would go to the highest bidder.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              simonsez3 months, 3 weeks ago

              God O Mighty, if I've got oil and you don't and you need oil, who the hell is in control?

              Reply
          • 0%

            ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

            4) There is not enough oil in ANWR to achieve energy independence right now. And that will be even more true in 10 years when the infrastructure has been built to extract the oil from ANWR.

            http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm

            http://www.doi.gov/news/030312.htm

            A Dept of Interior study projected that ANWR could produce a mere 1.4 million barrels of oil per day, which would increase U.S. production by ~25%.

            http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil...

            However, that 1.4 million barrels per day is still insufficient to wean the U.S. from 10.1 million barrels per day which the U.S. must import from other countries, including the 5.6 million barrels per day we import from OPEC.

            Even if we started drilling in ANWR today, we wouldn't see a drop of that oil for 10-20 years, which is how long it'd take for the infrastructure to be built. By then, increasing demand from China and India would offset the increase in supply.

            Reply

            5 Replies

            • 0%

              simonsez3 months, 3 weeks ago

              didn't mean positive. An additional 1.4 million bpd of our own would have a large impact on pricing.

              Reply

              4 Replies

              • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
              • 0%

                ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

                SIMONSEZ:

                "An additional 1.4 million bpd of our own would have a large impact on pricing."

                NO. It would only have a large impact on pricing if:

                (1) short supply was primarily responsible for driving up prices (it's not)

                (2) all oil drilled from ANWR is guaranteed to be sold in the U.S. (it's not)

                It's laughable you would attempt to refute my document-supported arguments without presenting ANY EVIDENCE of your own to bolster your unsubstantiated bloviating.

                LOL.

                Reply
              • 0%

                ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

                The Energy and Information Administration concluded in a 2007 survey that drilling in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf regions wouldn't have an impact on prices until 2030, if they had an impact at all.

                http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/o...

                "The projections in the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.

                Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant."

                Reply
              • 0%

                ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

                http://www.newsweek.com/id/142500/page/1

                "McCain has spent the week focusing on energy policy, making some surprising, and inaccurate, statements.

                McCain tried to paint Obama as an opponent of nuclear power, yet Obama has said he is open to nuclear energy and has supported bills that contained nuclear subsidies.

                McCain has soft-pedaled the cap-and-trade proposal for greenhouse gases, even denying that it would be a mandate. The cap is a mandatory limit, however, and McCain even says so on his Web site.

                McCain's new ad, running this week, rightly says that he bucked his party in supporting action on climate change years ago. But its images of windmills and solar panels are misleading in that he supports subsidies for nuclear power, which isn't pictured, and opposes them for wind and solar energy.

                McCain continues to say that a suspension of the federal gas tax will lower prices for consumers, though hundreds of economists say he is wrong."

                Reply
          • 0%

            ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

            5) You ignore the fact that the current rise in oil prices is NOT being driven by a lack of supply, but rather by the weak US dollar. Therefore, pumping even more oil into the market will have little effect on the prices because that's not what's driving high prices in the first place.

            Oil in ANWR would have done little to change oil prices, as OPEC would simply readjust their output to offset the relatively small in increase in domestic oil extracted from ANWR.

            Besides, the currently inflated global oil prices have more to do with the falling dollar, futures trading, and Middle East instability, than with oil in ANWR.

            6) There is no guarantee that oil from ANWR and the Gulf would make it to the U.S. Oil companies are loyal only to their stockholders and will sell the oil to the highest bidder to maximize profits. Because of the weak dollar, oil companies make more from selling this oil to Europe.

            This is demonstrated by the posts below:

            Reply
          • 0%

            ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

            http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P100650.asp

            "Every dollar increase in the price of a barrel of imported oil increases the size of the U.S. trade deficit, which puts more pressure on the value of the U.S. dollar, which leads to a weaker dollar, which makes OPEC countries want to raise the dollar-denominated price of a barrel of oil to make up for the dollars fall, and so on."

            http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/ga...

            "If the euro gains, oil becomes cheaper, European investors buy more oil, raising the price of oil in U.S. dollars."

            http://in.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idIN...

            "OPEC sees oil prices offsetting weak dollar. The surge in oil prices to record highs will shield OPEC nations, some of which peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar, from current dollar weakness, a Saudi newspaper quoted OPEC sources as saying on Saturday."

            Reply
          • 0%

            ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

            http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10940...

            "The immediate cause of rising oil prices is the weak dollar. Oil-producing countries are requiring more dollars to purchase the same barrel of oil because the dollar is worth less today than it was a few years ago. Center for American Progress estimates that 'nearly 40% of the increased price American consumers are paying for oil is attributable to the weak dollar," even after factoring in the effects of increased global demand from countries such as China.'"

            Reply

          • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
  • 0%

    miklkit3 months, 3 weeks ago

    The ANWAR oil will NOT come here. Our refineries can't handle it. It will do NOTHING for our energy independence.

    Reply

    4 Replies

    • 0%

      Lurch3 months, 3 weeks ago

      That`s right.

      Why did the US oil companies and Republicans refuse to add a rule to the law to make sure that all US oil was only sold/consumed in America?

      It`s our oil.

      We should not give them carte blanche to gouge us on our own resource.

      You want to keep gas prices low?

      Answer: competition

      If we open up drilling, we should have the oil companies bid to see which one will guarantee the lowest overhead over drilling and refining costs. Lowest bid gets the job.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

        Lurch - Most of what you say doesn't make sense.

        Our refineries can handle the oil if it comes because they'll replace foreign oil they refine with our own. And we should build new refineries, something the environmental lobby has prevented for 15 years.

        Our oil IS consumed here unless cheaper to trade off for a closer destination such as Alaska to Japan. It is all about economics. We would require our own oil to be used only here? when we consume so much of other countreis' oil. How hypocritical.

        Who's gouging us? Slow down your heating/AC use and driving, buy a hybrid, get solar panels, do something yourself.

        There already IS competition. People don't sell their oil for less than they can get just because it's an American who is burning it. That's the govt's job (to subsidize Americans).

        Lastly, the bidding process is already the way it works to get federal land oil rights leases. It is the HIGHEST bidder who gets it, if they qualify. Thus lower overhead to make profit

        Reply
    • 0%

      aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

      The Democrats threatened to filibuster, plus they didn't have the 60 votes they needed without Democrat help, and Democrats have always wanted us to drive smaller cars, and pay higher prices for the privilege. Don't you worry, we have S D building a new Refinery, and soon other states will follow.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

        As Lurch noted below ...

        The Republicans have voted against regulation and/or investigation of the speculators and cartel EIGHT times.

        That is the easiest and quickest and cleanest way to reduce prices.

        Reply

  • ML2007Comment removed: User banned.2 Replies

    • 0%

      riverat3 months, 3 weeks ago

      Good post- There is an area west of ANWR called the NPRA (old naval petroleum reserve) available and huge compared to anwr-and there is exploration going on. If drilling in Alaska could save us from high prices It would have already happened! Also better hurry- the days that trucks can travel is now half what it was a few years ago due to permafrost melting earlier.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

        You've been watching ice road truckers. They'll have to switch to boats.

        Reply
  • 0%

    Tangent0013 months, 3 weeks ago

    You wanna drop gas prices overnight? Re-institute regulation on the commodities speculators that are driving up the prices on everything from soybeans to oil.

    It's NOT all market forces, folks. Supply has remained steady, demand has gone DOWN because of the high cost, yet the price of a barrel of oil continues to go up and up.

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      Lurch3 months, 3 weeks ago

      Last I heard, the Republicans had voted against regulation and/or investigation of the speculators and cartel EIGHT times.

      This is the easiest and quickest and cleanest way to reduce prices.

      Why are the Republicans gagging for inefficiency?

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

        Last I heard oil commodities trading moved to London because of our regulations. Then it started to move back here when some regulations were removed. You CANNOT stop commodities trading and it will ALWAYS go on somewhere. I think oil futures will come down if we seriously announce we will drill off shore and in Alaska. I hope the speculators lose their shirts. Of course a national crash program to develop other energy sources will help too.

        Reply
  • 0%

    dunkirk3 months, 3 weeks ago

    ROFLMAO, yet based on estimates we have a years to two years supply of oil in ANWAR. I can really see the oil prices being lowered with that coming on the market. But hey I bet Dumya doesnt know there are seas of Methane on Jupiters moons. Now if he starts building Starfleet size tankers along with teleporters....woooooheeeeee 10 cents a gallon gas right.

    Reply
• 0%

  bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

  Domestic drilling will take 10 years to get going enough to get anything out of it, and the energy department has determined that 'extra' oil would only make around 75 cents difference in the price of a barrel of oil.

  We don't need to KEEP DRINKING OIL like it is water.

  We need to be ACTIVELY working on ALTERNATE sources of energy.

  Reply
• 0%

  jovial3 months, 3 weeks ago

  He's stuck in a time warp. he doesn't realize that what you say to one group is recorded. So you can't tell different groups different things.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

    Jovial, get real. I hear this over and over on this thread, yet ALL the politicians have been caught slanting and changing their positions according to the audience. Obama, Clinton and on and on. They really know, even McCain, and just hope it doesn't make the news.

    Reply
• 0%

  JoseMadre3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Where is the contradiction in wanting to preserve the environment and wanting to domestically produce more of what we are going to use? How many environmentalists want to stop all oil drilling worldwide? You guys are clearly untrained in formal logic. Go back to school.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • ML2007Comment removed: User banned.1 Reply

    • 0%

      tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

      ML: - "We must come up with NEW energy alternatives for our future". Logically this is not the topic here. It is about drilling our oil reserves. Although I am all for alternative energy development, the point of the article was that McCain flip flopped about drilling off shore. How about some common sense. It seems a no-brainer to drill for our own oil instead of watching China, Cuba and Viet-Nam drill right off our coast. I see you as totally untrained in economics and current business concepts and common sense. Keep your syllogism to yourself.

      Reply
  • 0%

    dunkirk3 months, 3 weeks ago

    ROFLMAO, so maybe you can elaborate on how a finite resource can be made to last forever by not looking at viable alternatives (under Carter he instituted a program to do just that with the gas crisis of the 70's, but was terminated by RayGun as too expensive vs funding for Star Wars) and the solution proposed is get more of it. And the get more of it wont be here for at least another 10 years. Hmmmmmm and it has to be Clinton right? Yet we've had a REPUBLICAN congress and President for how many years?

    Reply
• 0%

  JoseMadre3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Modifying positions when circumstances change is often a sign of maturity.

  Reply

  5 Replies

  • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
  • 0%

    bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

    Then your bunch must have thought that Kerry was very mature, as much as you accused him of flip-flopping ...

    Reply
  • 0%

    ybdogsct3 months, 3 weeks ago

    JOSEMADRE:

    "Modifying positions when circumstances change is often a sign of maturity."

    And just how much did circumstances change in the time between McCain's airing of a climate change ad that morning and his speech before the oil industry THAT SAME AFTERNOON?

    LOL. Keep spinning.

    Pathetic.

    Reply
  • 0%

    dunkirk3 months, 3 weeks ago

    "Modifying positions when circumstances change is often a sign of maturity."

    Hmmmm and when he changes positions from speech to speech I think its called pandering.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      disraeli3 months, 3 weeks ago

      No it's just forgetfulness.

      Uhhh, where are my keys?

      Reply
• 0%

  prayerfeathers3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Lets think about this.

  Is the oil crisis another McCain, Bush, Chaney and the Halliburton manufactured crisis?

  Similar to the search for weapons of mass destruction?

  I think the justice department should investigate who is behind the sudden raise in oil prices.

  Who do the traders represent? Texas oil barons? Halliburton? Bush-McCain supporters? Is this Bush, McCain, Chaney payback?

  With six months to go in the Bush, Chaney, Halliburton administration we suddenly have an oil crisis.

  And what is the answer?

  The opening of drilling all over the nation?

  Now who would benefit from this?

  Not that I do not agree that America should supply her own oil. But the timing of this crisis concerns me.

  I keep wondering if this is another Bush self-serving manufactured crisis.

  Please contact you elected officials and demand that they investigate this issue.

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    miklkit3 months, 3 weeks ago

    The republicons have a long history of creating a "crisis" whenever they need a diversion. Nothing new here.

    Reply

  • ML2007Comment removed: User banned.

• ML2007Comment removed: User banned.1 Reply

  • 0%

    Lurch3 months, 3 weeks ago

    McCain has been rewarded and continues to be rewarded for a lifetime of compromises on his own integrity.

    This is what happens when legacy children are given free rides through the top schools, special treatment, and are generally held above the responsibility norm for society.

    These are not the kind of people who should be allowed to run a Denny`s, let alone the WH.

    Reply
• 0%

  bubba23 months, 3 weeks ago

  McCain is such a good flip-flopper that he could have his own act in a Circus.

  Reply
• 0%

  hefaa13 months, 3 weeks ago

  "Flap Jack" McCain has flipped so many times that the GOP should have the RNC at the iHOP.

  Reply
• 0%

  Lurch3 months, 3 weeks ago

  It`s waaaaaay to late to start worrying about the `Flip-Flop` title now.

  Reply
• 0%

  automan9093 months, 3 weeks ago

  With McCain identifying that we need to drill our own oil and be self sufficeint he has just put the knife in obama's back. The country wants to drill and drill we will do. Obama's plan will just sink us deeper into oil dependency on the arabs.

  We don't want that and that is the number one topic that people want to solve. McCain will win with his re-evaluation of the oil situation.

  Tree huggers lose along with Obama

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    jmopinion3 months, 3 weeks ago

    As least McCain was smart enough and flexible enough to realize that most Americans want to drill instead of spending 700 billion a year on foreign oil which is 5 times the cost of the Iraq war.

    Reply
• 0%

  kedirian3 months, 3 weeks ago

  McCain should try and get his plastic surgeon to give him Cheney's lips. Then it'll be much easier talking out of both sides of his mouth!

  And even if he can't sneer like Cheney, he can at least wink-wink like Dubya....VERY TRUSTWORTHY, indeed!

  Reply
• 0%

  aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Who wins the election has nothing to do with flip flopping. Democrats have fielded yet another Liberal, this one bordering on Marxist. Today Democrats decided they want to Nationalize the Refineries. Do they not think Americans are watching? This is what Hugo Chavez did, and their Marxist candidate isn't even elected yet. We need to keep an eye on this guy.

  Reply
• 0%

  tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

  It is a no brainer to drill our own oil offshore and in Alaska. I am amazed at the lack of economic understanding here on propeller. The idea that 1 million barrels a day from ANWR and more than that from offshore drilling not making a difference is just showing ignorance. Almost all oil developments and refineries take time, around 8 years to come on line. To say that's too long is to say we never should develop solar, wind, geo and fusion power. It takes TIME!!! and always has. Blaming one party or another is not productive. What is productive is to do something. As far as the idea of big oil making too much money, that's silly too. Isn't that the idea of a business? How about the ones who have lost in the past. Are we to pay off their debts? If I drill a 6 foot hole in my back yard with a hand auger (cost = 0) and pure sweet crude starts flowing out, I will sell it at market price. If I become rich from that I will at least be helping our own economy, not the mid-east and others.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

    And I will continue to conserve by recycling, driving my little 11 year old Saturn until it falls apart in the middle of the road, growing tomatoes in my yard, supporting research on solar, wind, geo, tidal, nuclear, fusion and all other clean power sources, as well as better insulated houses. In fact I would recommend a "Manhattan Project" of alternative energy research in the U.S. funded by the feds, probably led by solar cell improvement to make that competitive, and fusion research for the more distant future. Watch the new "Green" channel people! It just started. The "Greensburg" show and "At Home with Ed" (Ed Begley)are great. Another show I've seen has 3 young men driving around the country checking out innovative and usually environmentally friendly companies. I think it's on the Science Channel. And please don't call me a Repuke or Bushie. I hate that. It's OK to tell me to get my talking points from Limbaugh though.

    Reply
• 0%

  aniokly3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Democrats, Damascus Rose, and Reid, are fighting Republicans at lifting the ban on offshore drilling now when gas is $4. a gallon. I bet they change their minds when it is nearly election day, gas is $7. a gallon, and the barbarians are at the gate.

  Reply
• 0%

  simonsez3 months, 3 weeks ago

  It blows my mind that so many don't understand the difference between fuel and electricity. The topic is more drilling and they're yelling wind and solar power.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    tiredofwhiners3 months, 3 weeks ago

    simon - There is a connection. Less oil means more other, such as coal, natural gas powered electric plants. An electric car doesn't use gas/oil but power generated by other means thus less oil needed. In some cases power plants do use oil. If there was cheap solar, nuclear or other power a lot less oil would be needed. When I was a kid, we used heating oil. That comes from oil. Now they may use natural gas or electric heating there.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      simonsez3 months, 3 weeks ago

      Power companies use wind, solar, hydro, thermal, coal, natural gas, nuclear and soon will add wave.

      Wind is coming along as quickly as the hardware can be mfg. and appropriate sites to use. It still requires subsidies and probably always will. Imagine the maintenance involved on these units when they have some age on them. Do they survive hurricanes and cause outage problems or brown-outs in certain areas?

      Oil is the natural fuel for autos formed over millions of years from everything that has ever lived. It's as important to us as trees and water and we have plenty to run the economy until hydrogen makes sense on a large scale.

      It has been vilified by Al Gore as being a danger to the planet to use. This pious bast*rd has endangered the world's fuel AND food supplies. It makes me furious.

      Reply

  • JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
• 0%

  Sandokan3 months, 3 weeks ago

  Know who and what McCain has been doing for this country,before casting judgement.

  Best Choice for President (in order) would have been:

  1. Hilary

  2. McCain

  3. Obama

  As the Chairman of The Transportation Committee under which the environmental issues fall, McCain has always voted for the environmental side.

  As a former Vietnam Combat Vet & Democrat - IMHO McCain is now the better choice for a President with experience. Obama just has promises .....

  Reply