HOW MUCH WILL DESTROYING ALASKAN WILDLIFE SAVE YOU AT THE PUMPS ?

[Jeffersons Ghost]

In a word, nothing; oil companies will simply become more profitable. The ONLY way to lower prices at the pump is to use much less gas and lower demand. Here's a better question: why do increases in the cost of crude drive up the price of Propane in Alabama where much of it is harvested?

Any old-school "tree-hugger" will tell you that drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge continues to be a prime talking point of rank-and-file Republicans. For as long as I can remember ultra-wealthy BIG OIL investors have licked their chops over the prospect of drilling in Alaska. Now by gouging consumers, Bushco believe they can sway public sentiment on environmental issues and make BIG OIL dreams come true.

EXXON SAYS, "GOODBYE STUPID BEAR BABIES, ENJOY THE AFTERLIFE IF THERE IS ONE!"


EXXON reports $8.4 BILLION in profit, as they hide money to offset media attacks, which may lead to an investigation. Profits for the company last quarter were over $10 BILLION.

Stop Fueling ExxonMobil's Anti-Wildlife Agenda

It’s time to hold ExxonMobil responsible for putting corporate profits over protection of wildlife and wildlife habitat. Join Defenders of Wildlife in urging ExxonMobil to clean up its act.

Fill out the form below to let ExxonMobil know that you will not buy ExxonMobil gasoline unless -- and until -- ExxonMobil abandons its lobbying efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge up to harmful drilling and takes meaningful action to curb global warming, to invest in renewable energy, and to pay for the damages done by the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska.

https://secure2.convio.net/dow/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=271

[stepnw1f]

1. We All Pay for the Damge to the Environment

one way or the other. That's why shit like this should be deemed as STUPID! Even from an economic stand-point, even if one didn't give a shit about wildlife, these assholes should know, they are feeding into a bigger economic problem than they were just in. Fucking stupid people are killing us all.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

4. stupid people will ALWAYS support killing like WAR!

As the fools declare war on MOTHER NATURE, I feel very safe in projecting a winner. Our benevolent Mother will destroy the human blight that infests this planet with natural desasters that profiteers invite and simply start over.

[stepnw1f]

7. The Problem is You and I Will Be Caught

indiscriminately in "Mother Nature's" crosshairs. I really dislike people who place profit before everything else. They are sick to the core.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

10. you better believe it stepnw1f

Unlike rank-and-file Republicans, Nature won't discriminate.

[jojo54]

5. The only problem is, they don't give a shit about the future.

They all have their underground bunkers with processed & filtered air, years & years supply of untainted food, communication, their own book of rules, etc...

all within halls & rooms no more than 12 inches wide because that's all the room their narrow minds need.

[stepnw1f]

8. Hell... I'll Get a Jar of Phemaldahyde for their Brains

Since they don't use them. Plus it's compact enough to fit in their bunkers where they actually belong. Kinda ironic, that they build and prepare their own jail cell or choice isn't it?

[Jeffersons Ghost]

12. INSTEAD OF THE ENDANGERED ELEPHANT AS A SYMBOL...

I SUGGEST THIS BETTER DESCRIBES THE PARTY!

[LynneSin]

2. Even if we did open up the Arctic Refuge....

and trust me, I'm not in support of it

The big lie is simple:

There isn't enough gas and nor will it get to us quick enough to make any impact on the current prices. Republicans are lying to consumers that somehow if we open up the Refuge now that this endless flow of gas will be available now. Geologist say there is about 2-5 years worth of gas and it would take us 10 years to get it. So why destroy the Refuge for a quick fix?

[wisteria]

9. Exactly! The dem's have got to get these points out! We may end

up being blamed for the cost of gas because of the environmental protection costs and now because we are against drilling. I can see the Repubs are trying to turn this on us big time.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

11. don't tell me... sign the petition and tell EXXON!

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. In the long run, absolutely nothing

Right now, some 66% of the petroleum we use in the United States comes from foreign sources. If we could get ANWAR oil production to maximum capacity tomorrow, that figure would drop to about 62%, not enough to substantially change the price at the gas pump. In reality, it will take 10 to 15 years for production to ramp up; during that time, the increase in price will more than outweigh any future increase in supply.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

14. BUY CITGO!!!!! BUY CITGO!!!!! BUY CITGO!!!!!

Venezuela's Oil Deal for U.S. Poor Draws Heat

Listen to this story... by Mike Pesca

Day to Day, January 10, 2006 · Venezuela has been selling oil -- far below market cost -- to people in poor neighborhoods in New York and Massachusetts. Since Venezuela's leftist President Hugo Chavez has fragile relations with the Bush administration, the gesture has created diplomatic fallout.

this isn't some off-the-wall News site. IT'S NPR!
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5147620

GAS is only 22 cents a gallon in Venezuela, because Chavez takes care of his people.

[wisteria]

6. I didn' t stop to think that the Repubs would use the current

oil issue to push for drilling and more drilling. Lying to the public about the benefits of this and filling their heads with thoughts of enough oil being drilled to satisfy our needs. What a bunch of slimy, greedy little d*cks they are.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

24. if you think about it, you'll see that invading Iraq was primarily...

an effort to drive up the value of crude... Every time there is ANY trouble in the Mid-East gas prices go up. Bush cronies in Houston have been sitting on oil for years, waiting for it to gain value... There used to be oil capped off, pumping nothing, all over the Texas oil fields. I bet they're pumping now.

[Gregorian]

13. I thought that fuel was going to Asia.

Don't make me act like I know what I'm talking about. I am just recalling something I read and heard. So we would not see any benefit from it. My guess is it would cover some of our Asian debt service.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. Oil is a fungible commodity

An increase in the world's supply would cause the price to decrease (but by how much is certainly up to debate).

[Jeffersons Ghost]

16. this is exactly like the bush plan to tap US oil reserves

It's like putting out a forest fire with a thimble full of water.... Buying Citgo and boycotting EXXON will have a big result in the short term.

[spooky3]

17. k&r

[Jeffersons Ghost]

19. thanks for all the votes

and thanks to CITGO for helping poor Americans last winter
and thanks to EXXON for Global Warming
and thanks to Bushco for destroying the Constitution and middle class in America.

[joanski0]

18. Nothing. I heard Ted Kennedy say

that the ANWAR oil will be going to China.

[Javaman]

20. As I understand it, the oil from ANWAR goes to Japan, no us.

and besides, the amount that would be removed wouldn't make a dent in tinfoil. It's just more repuke bullshit.

[ArmchairMeme]

21. Boycott has worked for me

For the past year I have saved 3 to 10 cents per gallon by passing the Exxon stations and stopping at the Citco stations. The price has always been lower at the Citgo station AND they pump it for me. The Exxon stations are always all self-service at the higher price - a no brainer!

It makes me feel good that for the past year I have NOT contributed to the Exxon billion dollar profits.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

23. good for you!

It's not just gas with me... I haven't been in Wallmart in a year... I thought they'd get me when I planted my Victory Garden this year, until I found a Farmers Co-op. The Co-op was so affordable it made Wallmart seem like shopping in Saks Fith Avenue (as if I'd really know how that felt.)

[rman]

22. 10 billion barrels - 4 months of global demand

MSNBC
Study: ANWR oil would have little impact
Heavy reliance on foreign imports would continue, agency finds
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/

Updated: 8:45 p.m. ET March 16, 2004

WASHINGTON - Opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil development would only slightly reduce America’s dependence on imports and would lower oil prices by less than 50 cents a barrel, according to an analysis released Tuesday by the Energy Department.

The report, issued by the Energy Information Administration, or EIA, said that if Congress gave the go-ahead to pump oil from Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the crude could begin flowing by 2013 and reach a peak of 876,000 barrels a day by 2025.

<snip>

Congress has grappled for years over whether to allow oil companies access to the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain in the Alaska refuge, which geologists believe harbors about 10.4 billion barrels of crude.

<more>