Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (135686)	6/4/2004 9:59:14 PM
From: Valley Girl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yes you are correct, and I apologise. It doesn't really change my point though. Here are his exact words: “We need a new direction on energy policy. For three years, George Bush and Dick Cheney have bent over backwards to help their big contributors in the oil industry. I’m going to stand up for students and middle class families and all those who need relief at the pump.” “I’ll use real diplomacy to do what George Bush hasn’t – pressure OPEC to start providing more oil. We’ll stop diverting oil to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve until gas prices get back to normal." See? It's the evil oil companies that are putting one over on us. Not that you could tell by looking at their share prices. But can you possibly mistake phrases like "relief at the pump" and "pressure OPEC to start providing more oil" and "gas prices get back to normal"? The message is clear, is it not? And exactly how is it that Bush hasn't been pushing OPEC to produce more oil - the Saudis have already agreed to boost production next month, and most experts think they will be flirting with their maximum. To be fair, he goes on to say this: “And instead of secret energy meetings and drilling in the Alaskan wilderness, we’re going to have a real energy plan for America. We’ll create 500,000 new jobs in renewable energy and building the vehicles of the future. Under my plan, America will be energy independent from Mideast oil in 10 years, the fuels of the future will be less expensive, cleaner, and our young men and women will never have to fight and die for foreign oil.” Sounds good, but no details. And is it realistic? We're going to kick the imported 60-70% of our petroleum habit in 10 years, while not developing the most promising potential reserves at home?!? Clinton should educate him on the dangers of inhaling! Seriously, though, I'll grant him some poetic license for campaign rhetoric, and would be interested in hearing about what he really wants to do. The Bush plan is equally vague of course. Except for the parts that aren't vague and that everyone hates, like drilling ANWR! Make no mistake, we will someday drill ANWR - we'll have no choice. But it would be best to hang onto whatever domestic sources we have as a hedge against darker days, so I'll give the point to Kerry.