Conservatives just don't get it!

[J. Fees]

thats not me.

[PETA]

sounded like you for a bit though

[vinnie97]

Republicans are only guilty of greed? Seriously, you might want to acknowledge the number of tax cheats emanating from the Democratic side of the aisle (Obama's own cabinet picks) before spouting more of that partisan nonsense.

[FarangBa]

Originally Posted by DFW303

The Savage nation. He's the guy that always screams on the radio right? The problem with conservatism is it's too stringent in it's ideology. And there is not enough diversity, variation the the gene pool. I believe in doing what works and quickly adapting to a volatile climate. All you hear from conservatives is cutting taxes and Ronald Reagan. Well sometimes you may need to raise taxes and have more regulation. Republicans really haven't had a good president since Reagan and there is a reason why. Because it's a party that favors rich white people and dupes Christians in voting for them. But it's really a party that stands for greed. I realize in North Texas if you are not conservative and like golf well tough luck keeping a job. So it's basically a conformist mentality you see here that has more to do with North Texas culture.

Regardless of the fact that we think you ARE feezy, your generalizations are about as wrong as possible:

I am as conservative as they come but...

Originally Posted by DFW303

Yeah, Right Wing conservative types are like these brain washed people. You know a lot of sick and twisted stuff happens behind the scenes at evangelistic churches in North Texas. I think that's why the Goth scene never went out of style with teenagers in North Texas.

I am not particularly religious (in an organized kind of way) and I loathe the mere existence of evangelistic religions.

Originally Posted by DFW303

I don't understand why Shawn Hannity is popular. He sounds like a quacking duck. You know a lot of these right wing conservative are either perverts and closet homosexuals.

I hate Rush Limbaugh (whether he is right or not) and Sean Hannity sounds like a quack half the time (whether he is right or not). The closet homosexual is just another crafty use of the media by Progressives like yourself.

Originally Posted by DFW303

Calling someone a troll is an easy cop out. Being conservative is popular in Dallas and that's why you are conservative. Just admit you're a sheep and that's the only reason your conservative.

It's actually quite "unpopular" these days in the entertainment industry (i.e. music, dj, etc.) and I couldn't give a shit what a bunch of doped up liberal sheeple think anyway. Luckily, retards tend to vote very inconsistently.

Originally Posted by DFW303

Conservatives also wear Dockers and talk in that annoying Tiger Woods profession tone accent. Real cheesy. Show me a right wing conservative that actually has good taste and thinks differently. They all like Window's and PC's too going against Apple's old logo which is ironic. It's also ironic that Dallas has a huge gay population and a lot of right wing conservative politicians.

What? You are losing me now. I hate PC's, I love Apple (Computers, iPhone & iPods, not the company). I don't know what a "Tiger Woods profession tone accent" even means? Is that even a complete statement? Are you talking about people who speak english properly, or what? In case you were unaware, Tiger Woods is hardly some privileged snot. Um, maybe you were just making a stereotypical statement about a black man who is not "Gangsta"? Surely, you wouldn't be going that far.
What does the size of the gay population of dallas have to do with being a conservative city? Do you think there are no conservative gay people? If so, I'll introduce you to quite a few. There is a homosexual radical left wing agenda, but saying that ALL homosexuals believe in everything the left wing propaganda spouts, is about as stupid as saying all conservatives worship the ground upon which Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh walk!

Pure Stupidity!

[FarangBa]

Originally Posted by J. Fees

thats not me.

I hope not, if so... you have REEEEAAAALLLLYYYY gone off the deep end now?

[J. Fees]

i dont hide behind screen names like the rest of you pussies.

[J. Fees]

im kidding, lighten up(pre response)

[FarangBa]

Originally Posted by Funkenstein

For Xian (and those wondering about the natural impact that the proposed wall would have):

http://blog.nature.org/2009/06/borde...e-conservancy/

I'm not a hippie, but I recognize the actions we want versus what could happen and am not happy with what could come out of it.

Who cares, build the fence around it. Call me a wacko rightwing nutjob, but I'm much more concerned with protecting our borders than a tree. Jeez.

What if another country tries to invade ours (you know like war & stuff), do you think we should not shoot back at their tanks because of a tree?

[Funkenstein]

Originally Posted by FarangBa

Who cares, build the fence around it. Call me a wacko rightwing nutjob, but I'm much more concerned with protecting our borders than a tree. Jeez.

What if another country tries to invade ours (you know like war & stuff), do you think we should not shoot back at their tanks because of a tree?

The difference here is that I'm dealing in realities of now and you are participating in active fantasy right now. Mexico is not going to make war on us at the moment. I can assure you of that.

The contested area is not known for being a conduit for illegals and is protected/patrolled in its own right already. Call me a hippie if you want, but "conservative" methods definitely would not hurt here as a pre-emptive effect as opposed to being an afterthought.

I assume that you were a staunch supporter of Palin's "Drill baby, drill" endorsement?

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Funkenstein

I assume that you were a staunch supporter of Palin's "Drill baby, drill" endorsement?

Seems a fairly decent method of getting more oil to market doesn't it?

[Funkenstein]

Originally Posted by PETA

Seems a fairly decent method of getting more oil to market doesn't it?

While it beats trying to dropkick Mother Earth into bleeding out some crude, we already hold access to a number of spots that aren't being used already. How is scouring for more (when it would take 4 - 5 years to eke it out) choice number one?

/scratches head

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Funkenstein

While it beats trying to dropkick Mother Earth into bleeding out some crude, we already hold access to a number of spots that aren't being used already. How is scouring for more (when it would take 4 - 5 years to eke it out) choice number one?

/scratches head

Who said it was choice number 1?

So, what "spots" do we have that we are not using that we could (absent our apparent silliness) be using?

The phrase has to to mean that increasing supply will help reduce price.. so drill. The assertion that it will take 4-5 years is unhelpful. It will take 4-5 years from the decision to tap it. The real problem is delaying the decision not the time it will take to get to market.

[FarangBa]

Originally Posted by Funkenstein

The difference here is that I'm dealing in realities of now and you are participating in active fantasy right now. Mexico is not going to make war on us at the moment. I can assure you of that.

The contested area is not known for being a conduit for illegals and is protected/patrolled in its own right already. Call me a hippie if you want, but "conservative" methods definitely would not hurt here as a pre-emptive effect as opposed to being an afterthought.

I assume that you were a staunch supporter of Palin's "Drill baby, drill" endorsement?

Umm, isn't there sort of a "major war" going on there right now? How about over 5,000 killed last year? How many soldiers have been killed in Iraq since 2003? 4,330 +4 two days ago!

Obviously, I'm not talking about the Mexican government. I was making a statement that your assertions are about as absurd to me as the invasion theory. It is apparent that you are waaaaay more concerned about a tree than you are about our country being "literally" invaded by illegal aliens daily.

Do you not see a correlation between "regulated & enforcement of immigration laws" and "better environmental impact"? In my opinion, if you were really that concerned about the environment, you would be FOR the proper enforcement of our immigration laws. I mean, do you have any idea the environmental impact that Mexico has on the ecosystem??

Let's be serious, I don't believe a fence alone will stop illegal immigration, but it will relieve some of the burden on the already stressed border agents (which will allow them to concentrate their forces in specific areas)!

P.S.: I have no issue with "Drill Baby Drill!". I do however, have an issue with the continual propagation of lies from the liberal left! It was not Sarah Palin who spoke those words. It was GOPAC Chairman Michael Steele. If you actually watched the Republican National Convention, you would know that he spoke "before" Sarah Palin.

I would agree that Sarah Palin backs the idea of drilling on our shores to reduce the amount of oil imported from psychotic dictatorships (Saudi Arabia, Venezuela & Iran ~by proxy~ to name a few). Dooooo, you have some sort of problem with that? If so, you may be a wacko environmentalist liberal who helped (along with simple greed) us in the United States get into the mess we are in.

Yes, typical greed got us started on the foreign oil, but the moment we realized we were creating a monster by buying more oil from foreign countries than pumped domestically..... the wacko environmentalists already had a stranglehold on our government. This made it virtually impossible for us to quickly end the foreign import of oil and re-start our domestic production.

The assertion that it would take 4 years or more to begin domestic production is another liberal lie propagated by the media and environmental types as well. The 3-5 yr range was given in a congressional hearing and was talking about how long it would take to get to 100% capacity. (i.e. building 1000mile long piplelines etc.). We can have oil begin pumping within a few weeks.

[Funkenstein]

Originally Posted by PETA

Who said it was choice number 1?

So, what "spots" do we have that we are not using that we could (absent our apparent silliness) be using?

The phrase has to to mean that increasing supply will help reduce price.. so drill. The assertion that it will take 4-5 years is unhelpful. It will take 4-5 years from the decision to tap it. The real problem is delaying the decision not the time it will take to get to market.

McCain was touting it pretty heavily and Palin's comments kinda added to the belief that "the Party" wanted that as option numero uno. Forgive the assumption if I am incorrect.

Now for the unused markets known to public (this was back during Bush reig, so it is a bit dated):

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5111184

Now on to the production question:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4621#more

[J. Fees]

The phrase has to to mean that increasing supply will help reduce price.

thats not necessarily true, last summer oil was over 130, this winter it got to 36$, did they find more oil in 3 months and a way to refine said oil? no.