Aceshardware

Wierdo · Joined: 27 Jun 2007 Posts: 184

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/2941630
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080517/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_mideast

Some nice nuggets there:

"
The skepticism of Israeli lawmakers about peace talks became clear even before Bush spoke. Two conservative religious lawmakers walked out during a speech by Olmert when he raised the subject of ceding land to the Palestinians.

One of them suggested that Bush is a stronger Zionist than Olmert. Olmert should "learn from the president of the United States what Zionism is," Israeli lawmaker Zvi Hendel said in a statement after walking out of the session as Bush looked on. Had Bush broached the issue, some analysts said, he could have been greeted with hisses, catcalls or even a similar walk-out protest.
"

Amusing, the guy's popular with extremists on all sides ;)

"
A front page editorial in Al-Gomhouria, another Egyptian state-owned daily, described Bush as "a failed president who delivers nothing but a lousy speech."
"

That's a pretty good summary of his ending legacy.

foo · Joined: 27 Jun 2007 Posts: 126

i think the real news come from his visit to saudi arabia and the refusal of the saudis to raise production (with the lame excuse of "there i no demand" WTF!!!!)

Wierdo · Joined: 27 Jun 2007 Posts: 184

foo wrote:

i think the real news come from his visit to saudi arabia and the refusal of the saudis to raise production (with the lame excuse of "there i no demand" WTF!!!!)

It's possible that the bottleneck is not in the supply but rather the refining, also the fact that the dollar is weak may play some role in the prices as well.

Another issue to consider is the booming developing world's emergent demand for these resources, so that may also raise prices even if our own demand is possibly stable - I would think ours would be rising as well though, even if relatively modestly, since I doubt alternative fuel technology at this point is able to cater to even the growth only.

It's also likely that this issue may be used as the cornerstone for a political attack on the environmental barrier to drilling in the arctic and such. If our oil "allies" are unable or unwilling to supply us with the supply that we supposedly need to drop prices, then it's be politically difficult to go against raiding our own resources.

Then again, this is all theory, so many variables involved in the equation to mess with :P

Paranoid · Joined: 02 Aug 2007 Posts: 224

Not that I want to feed you bone heads, but the US has more than 100 billion barrels of oil that are off limits because democrats and the environmental wackos. Clinton vetoed drilling ANWAR in the 90s when oil was $19/barrel, but somehow the news forgets this. After more than 300 congressional investigations since the democrats took control of congress, the only thing they have accomplished is that Halliburton was chased out of the US even though they legally did nothing wrong. I wonder what oil will cost after they chase out the rest of the oil industry. Will Obama be better at begging OPEC than Bush? I sure hope so. LOL!

martinw · Joined: 06 Sep 2007 Posts: 139

Paranoid wrote:

Not that I want to feed you bone heads, but the US has more than 100 billion barrels of oil that are off limits because democrats and the environmental wackos.

Ah, I haven't heard the Bush brothers called environmental wackos much, but whatever you say...

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0422-06.htm

In response to objections from his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the president reduced drilling opportunities in the Gulf of Mexico, and agreed to spend $235 million to cancel unused oil and gas leases elsewhere off Florida's coast and in the Everglades.

Paranoid · Joined: 02 Aug 2007 Posts: 224

Selectively picking a single state does not change the fact that the Bush administration's oil drilling policies were expansionary and it was democrats that were blocking it.

Democrat turban Durbin sponsored the bill to limit Bush.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9401E7DB163BF931A25754C0A9679C8B63

"Republicans had fought hard to block the measure, regarding it as a culminating blow to those delivered by President Bill Clinton, who put millions of acres of Western land off limits to development by designating more than 20 national monuments."

As usual you try to distort the facts, but it is easy enough to prove otherwise.

martinw · Joined: 06 Sep 2007 Posts: 139

foo wrote:

i think the real news come from his visit to saudi arabia and the refusal of the saudis to raise production (with the lame excuse of "there i no demand" WTF!!!!)

And the *really* interesting question is, why did he go in the first place and set himself up for such a public humiliation? I would expect some private calls first to set up the event in a way that saves face for both sides. He ran part of his 2000 election campaign on the pull he has with the Saudis:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A03E4D71030F93BA15755C0A9669C8B63

''I would work with our friends in OPEC to convince them to open up the spigot, to increase the supply,'' Mr. Bush, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, told reporters here today. ''Use the capital that my administration will earn, with the Kuwaitis or the Saudis, and convince them to open up the spigot.''

Of course one cannot read that without a wry smile today. Still, the whole situation is very curious.