I met with Mike last Monday at a benefit for his campaign. He is right on the ball with what had interested Texans. And if you haven’t gone to his website and read his report on the border, you have done yourself a disservice. It is excellent.

Last Friday I called his Austin office and was told he was already on his way back. Too bad. He is a great guy and a real family man with conservative Texas values. He has an uphill battle against the big lawyer money in Austin.

Anyone who can afford a fiver should sent it to Mike to help him win reelection. Texans need him. Americans need him.

Left by retire05 on August 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pm

Now Barry is saying that we should sell off some oil from the strategic reserve.

WTF??????

Sell off the reserve, but don’t drill for more??

The guy is on drugs or something.

Left by Jim Howard on August 4th, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Drilling won’t bring any new oil to the market for at least 7 years so what do you and MacCall propose to do in the meantime? Really, why are you so friggin dense?

Left by Senile McCain on August 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm

Being fairly new here I had to look it up to find Lamar Smith is my rep. What’s the information on him out there?

Left by pam on August 4th, 2008 at 4:09 pm

Being fairly new here I had to look it up to find Lamar Smith is my rep. What’s the information on him out there?

Lamar Smith only represents parts of Austin because of reckless GOP gerrymandering. He lives in San Antonio and only focuses on his hometown (taxpayer teat-sucking) issues. There’s a real good chance that Dems will regain control of the Texas House this year, in which case Austin will soon have a US Rep who speaks for its majority constituency, one whose influence has been substantially diluted by the San Antonio cartpetbagger.

Left by Pat on August 4th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

Drilling won’t bring any new oil to the market for at least 7 years so what do you and MacCall propose to do in the meantime? Really, why are you so friggin dense?

Really, you think it takes that long? We have a winner in the dense category, and probably the reigning champion.

Left by No2Liberals on August 4th, 2008 at 4:53 pm

Senile,

I have heard reports that that we could be pushing oil into the system in as little as 2 yrs. Im no expert but 7 seems a bit high. As long as private industry is leading the race to oil it should be pretty damn quick. Afterall, oil companies are greedy right? Which means they want to make money. So if they can bring up their own oil as opposed to ‘bending over the barrel’ im sure they would be much better off, which should relate to lower costs at the pump for everyone. Crude prices seem to be based on speculation and corruption at this point. Flooding the oil supply with excess oil production can do nothing but drive the cost per barrel down. Am I missing something here? It looks like simple supply-demand. Of course I dont know if that controversial topic is even being discussed in Universities these days.

The oil is here, and plenty of it, but the amount being harvested has not kept up with the demand. Drill Here, Drill Now and watch the cost per barrel fall. I hear its falling right now…

Left by HeavyGabe on August 4th, 2008 at 5:09 pm

I guess I need to speak a little slower for the remedial class. Oil companies are free to drill more now without any action from the president or congress. But if you’re talking politics then you’re talking about opening up new offshore oil leases (despite the fact that there are plenty of areas offshore that no oil company is drilling now) or ANWR. And neither will bring new oil for at least 7 years.

The big Republican proposal for new drilling areas will not help us for 7 years. I often wonder, why do Republicans hate America so much?

Left by Senile McCain on August 4th, 2008 at 5:46 pm

Senile, I am constantly amazed at how some of you can manage to only parrot the left wing talking points. Now, do to the my good nature, I will attempt to enlighten you (I use the word attempt as most liberals have such closed minds they are like the guy who sticks his fingers in his ears and shouts “Nah, nah, nah, I can’t hear you”:

1) from rig construction (most of which is done ON-SHORE, to pumping the first barrel, can be acheived with 24 months, or less, on most of the continental shelf.

2) the simple fact that the supply will increase within a short period (and yes, 2 years is a short period) will drive down prices as other nations lower their crude costs to get a jump on the competition

3) The Dems are touting their “use it or lose it” mantra. Only those who suffer severe grey matter deficits believe this. Oil leases are tied to actually production and are only extended for a fixed length of time (5-7 years). If at the end of that lease, there is no producing well, the government has the opinion to renew the lease, or give it to someone else. So this rhetoric, while the Dems are playing on it, is an outright lie.

4) The Dems excuse that there is already 68 million acres leased is moot if there is no oil there.

Left by retire05 on August 4th, 2008 at 8:34 pm

But I was much relieved to see that, though he’s home here in Austin right now, that he is still working — and not on recess like the Do-Nothing-Democrats

Hilarious.

I pray that you don’t really believe this caricature and it’s just political posturing.

As big and mean as they seem, Democrats too come home to speak to and to listen to their constituents.

Left by Preston on August 5th, 2008 at 5:55 am

You ain’t drilling your way out of this conundrum (there’s a reason why we libs call conservatives knuckle-draggers, y’know:)

Nocera calculates that if 9 billion people in 2050 used energy at the rate that Americans do today that the world would have to generate 102.2 TW of power—more than seven times current production. If people adopted the energy lifestyle of Western Europe, power production would need to rise to 45.5 terawatts. On the other hand if the world’s 9 billion in 2050 adopted India’s current living standards, the world would need to produce only 4 TW of power. Nocera suggests, assuming heroic conservation measures that would enable affluent American lifestyles, that “conservative estimates of energy use place our global energy need at 28-35 TW in 2050.” This means that the world will need an additional 15-22 TW of energy over the current base of 13.5 TW.

Left by Pat on August 5th, 2008 at 11:34 am

Pat,

what is India’s “current living standards”? thx

Left by HeavyGabe on August 5th, 2008 at 12:30 pm

And neither will bring new oil for at least 7 years.

The big Republican proposal for new drilling areas will not help us for 7 years.

Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true. Unless you are counting on the lawyers for the whack-job leftard enviro groups to prevent the drilling operations. When it comes to the whack-job enviros, the donks in Congress are their wholly owned subsidiary, but even if we get the Congressional approval needed for the drilling rights, they have the special interest groups and their lawyers to prevent America from being energy independent. One might even get the impression that the donks and the whack-job enviros want to see that $700billion cash transfer to the countries in the ME, but I still think it is just to support the anti-capitalism movement that drives the donks and the whack-jobs.

Left by no2liberals on August 5th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

from rig construction (most of which is done ON-SHORE, to pumping the first barrel, can be acheived with 24 months, or less, on most of the continental shelf.

Listen, ‘tard…there are plenty of existing leases available right now for drilling with proven oil supply. There’s nothing stop an oil company from going ahead and drilling offshore. The reason they aren’t is because there’s a very limited supply of drilling ships. So unless you know a jeannie who can conjure up a few ships in a couple months, I’m sticking with the 7 year estimate.

Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true.

The only one lying around here is you, jackass.

Left by Anonymous on August 5th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Okay, dingus, stick with your lie, fine with me, I expect nothing less from leftards. It still doesn’t make it true.
Everyone knows how ethical and truthful the left is.

Left by no2liberals on August 5th, 2008 at 2:28 pm

This is what American Petroleum Institute has to say on the issue of the time it would take for new deep ocean drilling to bring oil to market. Note, for the repugnant-cans, API is the lobbying organization for big oil.

Before a lease sale could even occur, a complete environmental study would have to be conducted by the government. Once leased, it could take anywhere from five to 10 years for production to begin, depending on the amount of oil and gas discovered, availability of infrastructure and the geological complexity of the region. In an area like Destin Dome, offshore Florida, where there is a confirmed discovery of natural gas and infrastructure exists, supplies could come on more quickly, perhaps in less than five years. Frontier and deepwater areas with no infrastructure in place would take longer.

Note, API’s timeline of at least 5 years doesn’t address the shortage of ships. http://www.api.org/policy/exploration/upload/Fact_Sheet_OCS_Moratoria_Top_Questions.pdf

And here’s what Bush’s own head of the Energy Information Admistration had to say about the prospects for new drilling: It won’t impact gas prices for many years. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=adlgNMu.LrHg

Expanded offshore drilling in the U.S. won’t affect oil and natural-gas prices much, the head of the Energy Information Administration said. Guy Caruso, speaking today at a press conference in Washington, said his agency had considered the effect of more drilling in a 2007 report. Higher energy prices this year might change the results, although the time needed for resource development would damp any outcome, he said. “It does take a long time to develop those resources,” Caruso said. “Therefore the price impact is muted by that.”

Why do Repugnant-cans hate America?

Left by Barry McCaul on August 5th, 2008 at 2:28 pm

Gabe - India’s only significant by extreme comparison. The fact is that there is not enough oil, coal, or wind available to sustain even the most conservative projections of near-term global consumption levels. Although developed countries are only now beginning to question the wisdom of their historically excessive energy consumption, developing countries like China and India are just now getting used to the modernization that has come with globalization and understandably want their fair share. Right now those two countries consume about one fourth of the energy that the US consumes per capita, but projections are for that to double by 2030, and that doesn’t even include the rest of Asia and South America. It’s increasingly obvious that the only way to quench modern humanity’s seemingly insatiable energy appetite is to get it from the sun, and just last week scientists at MIT may have finally cracked that code.

Fossil fuels are so 20th century.

Left by Pat on August 5th, 2008 at 4:35 pm

And here the U.S. is sitting on 27% of the world’s coal reserves, the veritable Saudi Arabia of coal, and some people don’t want us to use it, and we have enormous amounts of natural gas. Between the Barnett Shale, and the recently discovered Haynesville Shale, we have two of the largest gas fields in the world.
Ever hear of GTL technology? What was once old, is now new again.
The USAF has even gotten in on the GTL tech.

Left by no2liberals on August 5th, 2008 at 10:07 pm

Senile, you really are, aren’t you?
Try and remember you said this…“There’s nothing stop an oil company from going ahead and drilling offshore. The reason they aren’t is because there’s a very limited supply of drilling ships.”
Congress forbids drilling on 85% of the Continental shelf. You think that shouldn’t stop them from drilling? Where is all this area offshore that the oil companies can drill in, on the other side of the world?
There’s even a pretty map, with lots of colors for you to look at.
Of course there is a limited number of drilling ships, dingus, there is no demand. Of all the things the oil companies are alleged to be about, the only thing they really do that makes them money is to find and extract oil. Given the opportunities, and without the many hurdles they have to face with environmental impact studies, lawsuits, etc., they could get the oil into the system much quicker than seven, or even five years, once they have the equipment, and trained crews.
A 2005 RAND study estimates that about 800 billion barrels of oil trapped in shale are technically recoverable from the Green River Formation. This amount is more than three times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.
The US Minerals Management Service estimates that America’s outer continental shelf holds about 19 billion barrels of undiscovered recoverable oil and 85.7 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered recoverable natural gas. But Congress has outlawed development there.
We need energy, and as long as their are people like Piglosi preventing us from getting it, the free market is unable to do what it does best, get results.

Left by no2liberals on August 5th, 2008 at 10:33 pm

Then again N2L, these people may also be onto something.

Left by Pat on August 6th, 2008 at 8:55 am

I already knew you were a proponent of the flat-earth theory, Pat. Why point out the obvious?

Left by no2liberals on August 6th, 2008 at 10:48 am

Ha! Flat-earthers are the tribal elders of the drill-til-you-drop fatalists.

Left by Pat on August 6th, 2008 at 10:53 am

Not to me, the flat-earthers are of your cult, wishing to see us all live in caves, wear loin cloths, and pray to the altar of Karl Marx.

Left by no2liberals on August 6th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Moonbats protest for $10 a gallon gas…so the demand will decrease, and the price will fall.
What?
Like This Ain’t Hell says, this is what happens when you smoke pot before your Econ 101 class.

Left by no2liberals on August 6th, 2008 at 11:34 am

We’ll let history be the judge of that. In light of Reagan and Shrub’s sacking of both the treasury and the Constitution, it should make for same dandy summer reading.

Oh, and I’m an atheist so save yer misplaced insults for the crunchy granola crowd.

Left by Pat on August 6th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

History will be the judge of many. Currently three new books out on B-HO that will make some good summer reading, too.
In another light, we are still paying the price of the Horny Hick years, and the damage he did. Sure wish Perot had stayed out of those two elections, then we would have had only to endure four years of misery with a donk in the White House(President Peanutz), in the last forty years.
I know you are an atheist, Pat, among other things, but Marx is only a demi-god to the left, so I imagine you have a bust of him in your closet, surrounded with candles.

Left by no2liberals on August 6th, 2008 at 7:20 pm

but Marx is only a demi-god to the left, so I imagine you have a bust of him in your closet, surrounded with candles

Since when? When was the last time you read a treatise extolling the virtues of communism by someone representing the American left? You wingnuts cling to some of the most antiquated concepts like “Vietnam Syndriome” and “Jimmy Carterism” You do realize nearly than half the elctorate were in diapers durinf the 1960s right? That Encyclopedia Brittanica set you have is a bit outdated.

Keep pooing in that right hand bruther. Stick with Rush regarding the Way Things Ought to Be , and we in the reality-based community will tend to the shop while you kiddies go out and play in the yard for a decade or two.

Left by Pat on August 7th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

It really is comical how detached from reality the right’s vision of progressives is. But given the tendency of the right to stick with reinforcing media like Rush, Fox, or Instapundit it’s really not surprising at all to realize they have no understanding of the concerns of other Americans.

As for N2L’s delusion that the eight years of the Clinton administration were somehow a failure… I guess it’s just a result of the phenomenon I just described. If Rush and Brit Hume think it was less prosperous and less successful- well it must be.

Left by Preston on August 7th, 2008 at 8:02 pm

we in the reality-based community

Oh my.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
You truly are a caricature of a leftard.

As for Preston, he personifies denial. The Horny Hick’s record of failures speaks for themselves, as do his garment stains.
His accomplishment would take less space to cover, than his failures; getting elected and re-elected, both times with less than 50% of the popular vote.
As for the self-adoring term of progressive, what a steamy pile of leftard poo. What the left really proposes is proregression, to ideas and policies that have always failed, every time they were tried. Still must suck for you two, to be reminded the Berlin Wall has fallen.

Left by No2Liberals on August 8th, 2008 at 1:42 pm