created by: Rick | Jun 8, 2010

Arkansas

5,852 votes

Did you vote today?

Click on an option to vote

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other (explain below)
Comments
19,701 - 19,720 of 29,475 Comments Last updated 8 min ago
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21008
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
This should interest you then,
Since 2008
US drilling rigs - up23%
Wind and solar- up 116%
Petroleum imports-- DOWN 23%
I don't have a problem with oil production being up as a whole. I have a problem with Obama taking credit for private land owners doing what we have federal land set aside to do. Why don't they both drill and lets get 100% off of foreign oil and sell the excess we produce to other countries?
The cabbit

Bono, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21009
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with oil production being up as a whole. I have a problem with Obama taking credit for private land owners doing what we have federal land set aside to do. Why don't they both drill and lets get 100% off of foreign oil and sell the excess we produce to other countries?
I totally agree with your statement. That would have a positive affect on our economy. That's not the whole story though. It would be only a short term solution for a long term problem. We need other sources of energy. If we wanna stay off foreign oil. Once we run out we are out.
dont know nothin

Yakima, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21010
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with oil production being up as a whole. I have a problem with Obama taking credit for private land owners doing what we have federal land set aside to do. Why don't they both drill and lets get 100% off of foreign oil and sell the excess we produce to other countries?
The United States will overtake Saudi Arabia to become the world's biggest oil producer before 2020, and will be energy independent 10 years later, according to a new forecast by the International Energy Agency.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21011
Jan 21, 2013
 
The cabbit wrote:
<quoted text>
I totally agree with your statement. That would have a positive affect on our economy. That's not the whole story though. It would be only a short term solution for a long term problem. We need other sources of energy. If we wanna stay off foreign oil. Once we run out we are out.
True but with fracking, it gives us a long time before we run out

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21012
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with oil production being up as a whole. I have a problem with Obama taking credit for private land owners doing what we have federal land set aside to do. Why don't they both drill and lets get 100% off of foreign oil and sell the excess we produce to other countries?
Wht makes you think they don't


The U.S. exported more gasoline, diesel and other fuels than it imported in 2011 for the first time since 1949, the Energy Department said.

(Source: Bloomberg)

Shipments abroad of petroleum products exceeded imports by 439,000 barrels a day, the department said today in the Petroleum Supply Monthly report. In 2010, daily net imports averaged 269,000 barrels. U.S. refiners exported record amounts of gasoline, heating oil and diesel to meet higher global fuel demand while U.S. fuel consumption sank

(Source: Bloomberg)

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21013
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have a problem with oil production being up as a whole. I have a problem with Obama taking credit for private land owners doing what we have federal land set aside to do. Why don't they both drill and lets get 100% off of foreign oil and sell the excess we produce to other countries?
You should do a little research before you start throwing ou these Republican talking points.

Despite the one-year drop in production, oil production on federal and Indian lands from 2009 through 2011 totaled 2.027 million barrels. That's an average of 675,000 barrels per year during Obama's term, compared to an average annual production of 609,000 barrels annually during Bush's last term.

But it is an overstatement to say that "all of the increase" has been on private lands -- since, by definition, new permits and licenses have been granted for federal lands (bringing in more gas and oil).
Romney's claim that Obama's administration has "cut the number of permits and licenses in half" for federal lands is also not on the mark
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/politics/fact-c...

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21016
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WARRIOR wrote:
<quoted text>Indian lands are not federal lands bozo they should not be counted in your weak statistics. Obama has denied more permits on federal land over the past 4 years then any other president in history. That is a FACT!
"on federal and Indian lands"

Why would you think that said, Indian and federal lands are the same?
Observer

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21017
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WARRIOR wrote:
<quoted text>Indian lands are not federal lands bozo they should not be counted in your weak statistics. Obama has denied more permits on federal land over the past 4 years then any other president in history. That is a FACT!
It is not a fact unless Barney makes it up

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21019
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WARRIOR wrote:
<quoted text>Indian lands are not federal lands bozo they should not be counted in your weak statistics. Obama has denied more permits on federal land over the past 4 years then any other president in history. That is a FACT!
If that is a fact you should have no problems posting proof that it is, what you say it is.

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21022
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WARRIOR wrote:
<quoted text>Here is something you love so much! ENJOY!
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/pr...
Fact Check that! LOL!
From your post;

Romney exaggerated, however, when he claimed the number of new permits and new leases for drilling on federal lands declined by half. The decline isnít that steep,

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21023
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WARRIOR wrote:
<quoted text>You ever heard of the Mescalero Apache Reservation in New Mexico? Reservations are their own little countries bozo. Feds have little control or jurisdiction over them! There are over 500 recognized Native American tribes in the United States. You should really get out of the backwoods more often! Hope that helped.
You said federal lands, WTF has that got to with indian nations?

Your Quote:

"Obama has denied more permits on( federal )land over the past 4 years then any other president in history. That is a FACT"!
jim

Oklahoma City, OK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21024
Jan 21, 2013
 
Yes

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21025
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

production on federal lands fell by 14 percent in fiscal year 2011 (after a 15 percent increase the year before). But overall, oil production on federal lands saw an increase of 1 percent during the last five fiscal years.

https://www.google.com/url...
Reality Check

Mountain Pine, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21028
Jan 21, 2013
 
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>The United States will overtake Saudi Arabia to become the world's biggest oil producer before 2020, and will be energy independent 10 years later, according to a new forecast by the International Energy Agency.
The first part I believe could come true if Obama wasn't trying to push the green energy agenda so hard. He only wants us energy independent if, and only if, we do it without oil. I would suspect that all his cronies, like Al Gore, have a monopoly on green energy. That way they all get filthy rich and claim they are saving the planet. We all know the oil industry is the sole reason for all of our greenhouse gasses and global warming because Obama said so. I'm sure he doesn't have an alterior motive.
Reality Check

Mountain Pine, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21029
Jan 21, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Wht makes you think they don't
Plain and simple. Look at how much of our tax dollars Obama is pouring into green energy. If he didn't have a problem with oil he would simply allow these companies to do the research slowly to perfect the technology. instead he pours billions of our tax dollars into green energy companies that everyone knew was going to fail. Some even warned the White House against such investments. He's pushing too hard, too fast to be totally accepting of the oil industry. He wants them out and he wants them out now but he knows he can't because so much of what we have depends on oil. Such a transition will take decades and Obama simply doesn't want to wait that long.
Reality Check

Mountain Pine, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21030
Jan 21, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You should do a little research before you start throwing ou these Republican talking points.
Despite the one-year drop in production, oil production on federal and Indian lands from 2009 through 2011 totaled 2.027 million barrels. That's an average of 675,000 barrels per year during Obama's term, compared to an average annual production of 609,000 barrels annually during Bush's last term.
But it is an overstatement to say that "all of the increase" has been on private lands -- since, by definition, new permits and licenses have been granted for federal lands (bringing in more gas and oil).
Romney's claim that Obama's administration has "cut the number of permits and licenses in half" for federal lands is also not on the mark
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/04/politics/fact-c...
What Republican said what I just said? Did I say "all of the increases" or did you add that yourself? For someone who prides themselves on citing sources, you sure don't mind inserting things you need to change the meanings to fit your "counterpoints". The question is, do you believe the "new and improved" post after you have edited it? I think you do.
Post Turtle

Salem, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21031
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

If you can somehow force a liberal into a point- counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you've said -- unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It's like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.
Old Army

Greenbrier, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21032
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Post Turtle wrote:
If you can somehow force a liberal into a point- counterpoint argument, his retorts will bear no relation to what you've said -- unless you were in fact talking about your looks, your age, your weight, your personal obsessions, or whether you are a fascist. In the famous liberal two-step, they leap from one idiotic point to the next, so you can never nail them. It's like arguing with someone with Attention Deficit Disorder.
Perfect description of Barney.
Observer

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21033
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
From your post;
Romney exaggerated, however, when he claimed the number of new permits and new leases for drilling on federal lands declined by half. The decline isnít that steep,
And you exaggerate a little when you insinuate that Obama is doing a good job, but the big difference is that Romney's exaggeration didn't hurt anyone and your's is killing us.
The cabbit

Bono, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21035
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Plain and simple. Look at how much of our tax dollars Obama is pouring into green energy. If he didn't have a problem with oil he would simply allow these companies to do the research slowly to perfect the technology. instead he pours billions of our tax dollars into green energy companies that everyone knew was going to fail. Some even warned the White House against such investments. He's pushing too hard, too fast to be totally accepting of the oil industry. He wants them out and he wants them out now but he knows he can't because so much of what we have depends on oil. Such a transition will take decades and Obama simply doesn't want to wait that long.

Once again people failed to post there source. If you just rant on with out one people might not think you have all your facts. I was curious about your statement. So i started digging here is what i found. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
wreck 9 hr Guest 22
Imperial Theater (Aug '12) 10 hr Guest 132
school 10 hr Guest 6
Juveniles arrested 10 hr Boom boom 5
Shannon Joplin 16 hr Shannon 3
Irish Setter dog/Lab puppy 21 hr Guest 7
Nathan Nelson busted again Thu information 1

Search the Pocahontas Forum:
•••
•••
•••

Pocahontas Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Pocahontas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Pocahontas News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Pocahontas
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••