Bush Needs To Leave
 

Ok, Heres my thread....

Y bush should leave..... (feel free to post your comments on y)

OK, He supports drilling in Alaska, but opposes gay marriage? Tell this me this does not make sence..

Bush is trying to win over the Christians votes. Thats all hes doing, He could give a rats ass. NO GAY MARRIAGE, ORGONIZED PRAYER IN SCHOOL (which I have no problem with), ABORTIONS! Tell me that does not have something to do with Christians
Ya know what, Let the people do what they want, This is America!
Ok, Back to the Alaska Gay thing...
He wants to drill in something that is still untouched by man, So we can have oil that will ruin out in 20 years. Now please someone tell me what is going to hurt the futures children first? Gay Marriage or Drilling In Alaska, and helping with global warming? You tell me.

Like I said, This is America. LAND OF THE FREE, my ass!

Please let your voice be heard, I want your opinions, Pros or Cons. Good or bad!

You won't get any arguments from me. ;)

The only thing is I am for drilling in Alaska because if anything it will hasten our dependance on oil by drilling all of it out the earth faster :cool:

Yes, and we can permanently f*ck up the wildlife not only in Alaska, but across the country as well. Small price to pay to keep those SUVs a'blazin', I suppose.

Blah Blah Blah - it is possible to drill for oil and and not cause the end of the drama the liberals proclaim will happen. But, the environment will be affected - on that we agree; I assert, however, it will not be as bad as the liberals say. Again, I say do it now and get it over with :cool:

Why cause ANY effects for only a six month supply of oil, Jason?

Well, no one really knows how much is down there - there could be none or 10 years worth. If drilling oil was that exact, there would be many rich people who did not go bust trying :laugh:

Again, I know the reality is no alt. fuel sources will ever be seriously mass produced until the last drop of oil is drained from the earth. SO, I say do it now and let's get it over with - partially joking and scarily partially serious.

No objections to your post here Jacob. Big surprise. :lol:

Preaching to the converted here too! :)

I don't see why you believe the two are in any way related, except that Bush supports both. At the bottom you make a comparison that both affect the future. This is true of all policies. Why are these specific two so contradictory to each other? Please explain further as to why holding both these positions makes no sense to you.

I wonder how you are so confident that Bush does not care about any of the positions he espouses? But you are correct in that many Christians agree with the above stances. Does that negate them? You know, Kerry is trying to get Christians to vote for him, too. Do you think that is bad?

Why does the fact that you disagree with the current president's policies grounds to declare that America is not the land of the free? Are you not free to vote Bush out of office? Please explain this statement further as well.

Thank you. :)

I think there's a clear distinction between trying ot get the Christian vote and letting the Christian vote (and faith) affect your policies and decision making, which I submit Bush has done. We are not all Christians and he shouldn't be making such decisions in our name. What is immoral to him may not be to me.

That's funny, our own government has told us that the amount of oil in the Alaska would last the US for six months and that's it. ;) Have any facts or figures to prove otherwise?

FACT: The amount of oil that the U.S. Geological Survey estimates could be recovered from the Arctic Refuge would amount to less than a six-month supply for American consumers. Even less natural gas occurs under the Refuge relative to U.S. demand.

FACT: At no time would oil from the refuge be expected to amount to more than 2 percent of U.S. demand. It will take 7 to 10 years for any oil to make it to market. 95% of the Alaska's North Slope is already available for oil and gas exploration and development.

FACT: Even if the highest predictions of oil in the refuge were to come true, oil from beneath the refuge would provide no more than a blip on the global oil market and would therefore have a negligible impact on the price of oil. Nor would drilling for oil in the refuge address our country's long-term energy problem.

http://www.enn.com/news/wire-stories.../reu_46823.asp
U.S. government study says Alaska drilling is harmful
Tuesday, April 02, 2002

Opening Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling could harm caribou, snow geese, and other wildlife, a new U.S. government study said Friday, despite the Bush administration's assurances that oil exploration would have little impact.

The report, written by the Interior Department's U.S. Geological Survey, was published 10 days before the U.S. Senate is due to launch a contentious debate on whether to allow drilling in the pristine refuge on Alaska's northern coast.

According to the government report, drilling in the refuge could especially hurt the Porcupine River caribou herd, which travels some 400 miles from Canada's Yukon Territory to the Alaskan coastal plain for calving in May and June. The herd, which has dwindled to an estimated 123,000 animals, uses the entire coastal plain area which the Bush administration wants to open to drilling.

Pregnant caribou avoid roads and pipelines and calves have ''repeatedly shown to be sensitive to disturbance," it said. "Oil development will most likely result in restricting the location of concentrated calving areas, calving sites, and annual calving grounds," the report said. "Expected effects that could be observed include reduced survival of calves during June, reduced weight and condition of (pregnant) females, and reduced weight of calves in late June."

While Bush and many Republicans have repeatedly endorsed drilling, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said recently that it would take about two decades before any crude oil pumped from the refuge could reduce U.S. oil imports.

Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said the new report showed why drilling is a bad idea. "The administration should take to heart the conclusive scientific findings of the U.S. Geological Survey and finally put aside plans to drill in the pristine wilderness of the Arctic," Kerry said in a statement.

Hey,
My comments are what I stick by. My comparison it concerning the future, I didnt really make that clear, sorry. Bush Supports drilling in Alaska, and opposes gay marraige. (I myself am not gay, but I do have an opinion that everyone should have equal opportunities as others) OK, I have a bigger concern on having a pollution free world for future generations, which may never happen anyways. But why make it worse and drill in land that is untouched by man and take a risk or hurting an eco system. For future kids who will run this country, why should they have to fix a mess that someone left behind? Now whats going to hurt the future more? Gays or Pollution and No ozone layer?

I am myself a Christian (No I dont act like it, and Yes that makes me a hipocryt) But that is what he is doing, What a better way to gain more votes then to put a constituonal amenment on things that bible says are a sin. My friends church praises pres Bush for all this and treat kerry like satin. I think its wrong to put ammendments on things that have no purpose. I think there should be a ammendment on outsourcing Jobs. Or medicare, or health insurance for people who can't get it. Bush also wants a Tax cut for people who make over $200,000. SO what.... Us people who make less than that dont get anything? Bush is all about making the rich richer.

Of course I believe that this is the land of the free, but people don't treat it like that. If this was land of the free we would not have censorship. I know america has more freedom than everyone else. I love this counrty and I dont want to see it turn inot something horribel.

Sorry if anything I said struck a nerve with you, I hope no hostilities. :) :thumbsup: :cool:

Dis - as those fact you cited explicitly state - those are all estimates. There is no way to know how much oil a well will produce until it produces it. They can make very good guesses (seismic testing, log charts, migratory patterns, past history, directional drilling from other wells, etc.), but they cannot predict with 100% accuracy if there is actually oil there or how much is there until they actually drill the well.

I grew up in SW Louisiana which is oil country. I know many in the oil business. I also know many a speculator who has had all of the above suggesting that there MUST be oil on this land and then comes the dry well :shocked: :shocked: :shocked: Trust me on this one!!! :cool:

Yes, I'm sure their six month estimate will be proven wrong when they get there and discover that it's got seven months worth of oil. ;)

My point is, why kill the ecosystem and the innocent animals for such a small oil supply? Why ruin everything on the off chance that there may be a few more barrels? Should we just roll the dice and find out when we get in there that's much less than has even been predicted? It makes no sense either way. You're not going to sell me on this, Jason, it's capitalism at it's worst. :p