Senator Stevens (R - Alaska) Indicted by Rilke - Page 2 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Senator Stevens (R - Alaska) Indicted
Page 2 of 8
Thread Tools
Vanster
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
21 - 07-29-2008, 13:45
Reply With Quote
What a dick. I always voted against him, and he ranks among my most hated politicians ever.

If this is true, I hope he gets to spend some time at the state pen in Wasilla. I'm sure there are a lot of residents there eagerly anticipating his arrival.
 
Vanster is offline
 
Sponsored Links
ZOD
VeteranX
Old
22 - 07-29-2008, 13:49
Reply With Quote
Drilling for oil in Alaska is not part of the solution and just to solidify that:
A conversation with Amory Lovins - Charlie Rose

I'm not with him on the nuclear issue as the price is not set in stone for all eternity and I'm certainly against fuel cells but his main points about oil and efficiency are spot on.
 
ZOD is offline
 
TseTse
VeteranX
Old
23 - 07-29-2008, 13:51
Reply With Quote
Well, this is a case where Mccain oughta come out VERY VOCALLY in favor of a massive energy program to develop nuclear, wind and solar infrastructures. I'm talking massive investments.

He could beat Obama on the environment and do it in a pro-business manner, if he's smart.
 
TseTse is offline
 
triple
VeteranXV
Old
24 - 07-29-2008, 13:52
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Are you truly naive enough to think opening oil drilling off-shore in florida or up in alaska is going to lower our ****ing gas prices? Seriously?
Couldn't ****ing hurt?

You say wind/nuclear **** like im against it. Im not. I want to do everything, not be all selective and pick and choose which methods.

What if - hypothetically - we don't develop ****? Like, NOTHING would be viable. **** just doesn't work out like we planned.

Then we're kind of in deep **** 20 years from now, eh?

If we have massive drilling operations off our coasts and in alaska, we might just be a tad better off. Better safe than sorry.
 
triple is offline
 
Rilke
VeteranX
Old
25 - 07-29-2008, 13:53
Reply With Quote
Drilling in ANWAR is last ditch handout for friends from a lame duck President.
 
Rilke is offline
 
triple
VeteranXV
Old
26 - 07-29-2008, 13:57
Reply With Quote
first off, its ANWR, you ****ing retards. If you're going to try to debate the issue, try actually knowing how to spell the major players. You sound like you heard it pronounced ANWAR on tv or from a moveon ad, and you're too stupid to know what it actually stands for.

second, so what? You act like increased domestic supply is a bad thing. We're not getting off oil anytime soon, might as well. If its not urgent now itl be urgent in 10 years. Except if we START now, that drilling would actually help - 10 years down the line.

No, its not going to help immediately. There might be a shallow bump, thats it. But oil prices aint getting any better. Itd be stupid to not see a trend.
 
triple is offline
 
TseTse
VeteranX
Old
27 - 07-29-2008, 14:00
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple View Post
second, so what? You act like increased domestic supply is a bad thing. We're not getting off oil anytime soon, might as well. If its not urgent now itl be urgent in 10 years. Except if we START now, that drilling would actually help - 10 years down the line.
You're a moron. Let's just reiterate that.

You still do not grasp that oil prices are determined globally, and unless you are advocating for GASOLINE SUBSIDIES by the USA... this drilling wouldn't do **** for us any time soon.

Even this douchebag Stevens in that clip finally admits it's a "long-term" argument.

In the "long-term," we need to get off oil dependency. Period. Trying to focus on extending that dependency is insanity and stupidity.
 
TseTse is offline
 
triple
VeteranXV
Old
28 - 07-29-2008, 14:01
Reply With Quote
This is not about fixing our current problem, its preventing a future one. But you're too short sighted to see that.

LONG TERM, we need to do EVERYTHING. Alternative energy, more drilling, nuclear power, you ****ing name it. Why are you limiting yourself for no reason?

Oil dependency is not a state of mind its a fact of life. We can't "get off oil" any more than we can stop breathing. And UNTIL we develop this magic new technology, we need to secure as much as we can. We can't just pin all our hopes on this brand new tech and hope to god it fixes things. Try being realistic for once in your life.
 
triple is offline
 
Last edited by triple; 07-29-2008 at 14:03..
-§trife-
VeteranXV
Old
29 - 07-29-2008, 14:03
Reply With Quote
It's not really stupid to drill for oil when nothing else besides nuclear is even close to reaching parity with it.
 
-§trife- is offline
 
KnightMare
VeteranX
Old
30 - 07-29-2008, 14:04
Reply With Quote
we should drill in ANWAR and sell it to china, we'll be rich.
 
KnightMare is offline
 
Bounty
Love
Old
31 - 07-29-2008, 14:04
Reply With Quote
I'd **** the **** out of their governor.



 
Bounty is offline
 
TseTse
VeteranX
Old
32 - 07-29-2008, 14:04
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple View Post
Couldn't ****ing hurt?

You say wind/nuclear **** like im against it. Im not. I want to do everything, not be all selective and pick and choose which methods.

What if - hypothetically - we don't develop ****? Like, NOTHING would be viable. **** just doesn't work out like we planned.

Then we're kind of in deep **** 20 years from now, eh?

If we have massive drilling operations off our coasts and in alaska, we might just be a tad better off. Better safe than sorry.
You do realize that there is very sophisticated nuclear and wind technology, right? You've been so used to thinking this is idealistic hippie **** that you've stopped paying attention to reality.

The wind tech could be implemented in massive scales this year. There's no excuse, and the reason folks roll their eyes at morons screaming about ANWaR is because it indicates how clueless they are about our needs and what our options are.

Solar energy is also fairly mature, although i think it's smarter to wait a few more years for it to mature even more... before investing in large scale implementation. Then again, it wont progress and get cheap if we dont use it.

In the same ****ing time it would take to rebuild all our refineries, start taking in oil from new offshore drilling and from ANWaR... we could have moved ahead with nuclear plant development, large scale wind systems and some initial municipality scale solar projects.

We need to be the cutting edge in this technology, not stuck in oil barron mindsets.
 
TseTse is offline
 
TseTse
VeteranX
Old
33 - 07-29-2008, 14:06
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by triple View Post
We can't "get off oil" any more than we can stop breathing.


yes, triple, we're the ones being shortsighted.

you do realize this is a limited resource, right? it doesnt just keep coming out of the ground forever, triple.

ps. i predict we hit "peek oil" within 50 years.
 
TseTse is offline
 
Last edited by TseTse; 07-29-2008 at 14:08..
triple
VeteranXV
Old
34 - 07-29-2008, 14:06
Reply With Quote
Quote:
.You do realize that there is very sophisticated nuclear and wind technology, right?
Sure, we'll be driving around nuclear cars in NO TIME.

My ****ing god you're stupid.

And im all for wind and nuclear power! That's the thing! I never said im against alternative energy! That's YOUR fantasy debate.

You are against drilling, im FOR everything including alternative means.
 
triple is offline
 
triple
VeteranXV
Old
35 - 07-29-2008, 14:08
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by TseTse View Post


yes, triple, we're the ones being shortsighted.

you do realize this is a limited resource, right?
And.. you would be the one wanting to limit us further by restricting drilling?

You're not making a ton of sense.
 
triple is offline
 
cogzinofa
VeteranXV
Old
36 - 07-29-2008, 14:10
Reply With Quote
I forget where I read it, but someone worked out the math and found that increasing MPG standards in the US by just 4 MPG would result in a net oil savings per day that would exceed ANWR output per day.

so why don't we just increase MPG standards?
 
cogzinofa is offline
 
-§trife-
VeteranXV
Old
37 - 07-29-2008, 14:11
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by TseTse View Post
You do realize that there is very sophisticated nuclear and wind technology, right? You've been so used to thinking this is idealistic hippie **** that you've stopped paying attention to reality.

The wind tech could be implemented in massive scales this year. There's no excuse, and the reason folks roll their eyes at morons screaming about ANWaR is because it indicates how clueless they are about our needs and what our options are.

Solar energy is also fairly mature, although i think it's smarter to wait a few more years for it to mature even more... before investing in large scale implementation. Then again, it wont progress and get cheap if we dont use it.

In the same ****ing time it would take to rebuild all our refineries, start taking in oil from new offshore drilling and from ANWaR... we could have moved ahead with nuclear plant development, large scale wind systems and some initial municipality scale solar projects.

We need to be the cutting edge in this technology, not stuck in oil barron mindsets.
Photovoltaics have been around for over 100 years and without government subsidies solar is still ~3 times more expensive to produce a kilowatt-hour of electricity than oil, coal, natural gas, and uranium.

Saying we, as in the entire world including China/India, are going to ween ourselves off of oil as long as it remains a more efficient source of energy than alternatives is a pipe dream. We're not going to leave oil in the ground as long as its cheaper. Solar and wind are going to be developed because of subsidization and other government intervention. If it were some silver bullet solution we wouldn't even be in any sort of energy crisis to begin with.
 
-§trife- is offline
 
KnightMare
VeteranX
Old
38 - 07-29-2008, 14:12
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cogzinofa View Post
I forget where I read it, but someone worked out the math and found that increasing MPG standards in the US by just 4 MPG would result in a net oil savings per day that would exceed ANWR output.

so why don't we just increase MPG standards?
because SUVs are so damn cool. plus we have people like ted stevens and triple in this country.
 
KnightMare is offline
 
Bounty
Love
Old
39 - 07-29-2008, 14:12
Reply With Quote


She wants it.

Must get awfully lonely up there in polar bear country.
 
Bounty is offline
 
Bounty
Love
Old
40 - 07-29-2008, 14:14
Reply With Quote
Here she is at a press briefing:



Not as hot there. But I'd still let her press my briefs.
 
Bounty is offline
 
Last edited by Bounty; 07-29-2008 at 14:16..
Page 2 of 8
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Senator Stevens (R - Alaska) Indicted

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
.another jew , .bites the dust , corrupt asshole , series of tubes , stupid fucking republican


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 19:01.