AOC Is Grief Stricken

The tears of a commie. I think what happened is AOC confused motherhood with mother earth and believes she is mother earth. Reminds me of an old margarine commercial.

AOC CRIES: Earth Facing ‘Extinction,’ ‘Dreams Of Motherhood Now Taste Bittersweet’

Daily Wire — Ryan Saavedra

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) cried on Friday during a climate alarmist speech in Copenhagen at the C40 World Mayors Summit where she claimed that her “dreams of motherhood now taste bittersweet because of what I know about our children’s future.”

Ocasio-Cortez began her alarmist speech by claiming that humanity was at a crossroads of “extinction or opportunity,” adding that there is “no middle road” on climate policy.

“The climate crisis is already here,” Ocasio-Cortez claimed. “On this note I speak to you not as an elected official or public figure, but I speak to you as a human being — a woman whose dreams of motherhood now taste bittersweet because of what I know about our children’s future, and that our actions are responsible for bringing their most dire possibilities into focus. I speak to you as a daughter and descendant of colonized peoples who have already begun to suffer.”

“It is not a coincidence that these disasters get relatively little media coverage, and that even less of the coverage dares to mention climate change,” Ocasio-Cortez falsely claimed. Media coverage of natural disasters often get significant coverage, with “climate change” being one of the top points parroted by the media.

“It is not a coincidence that the truth is controversial,” Ocasio-Cortez continued. “None of this is a coincidence because climate change is not a coincidence or a scientific anomaly. Climate change is a consequence. It is a consequence of our unsustainable way of life.”

Ocasio-Cortez then suggested that capitalism promotes “lawbreaking pursuit of profit” and that capitalism only benefits “the very few,” despite the fact that capitalism has lifted more people out of extreme poverty than any other economic system.

Ocasio-Cortez then admitted that her far-left $93 trillion plan is really about “chang[ing] society” and “winning” in politics, and that the desired outcomes are to fix “injustice” and promote “equality.”

This is similar to what Ocasio-Cortez’s former chief-of-staff Saikat Chakrabarti admitted during an interview.

The Washington Post reports:

Chakrabarti had an unexpected disclosure. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal,” he said, “is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.” [Sam Ricketts, climate director for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D)] greeted this startling notion with an attentive poker face. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.” [emphasis added]

Article posted at Daily Wire

Well, no middle of her road. I’m not sure she is qualified to speak as a human being. All that Marxist stuff running through her veins would sort of contradict that.

No coverage on the “climate crisis?” That’s all they talk about. The MSM cannot cover a legitimate natural disaster without making it about climate change or Global Warming.

No, it’s not a coincidence or scientific anomaly …. it is pure politics and socialism, about defying all our freedoms and rights. They admit it isn’t about climate change; it’s about their agenda. So what are the consequences of that agenda?

What is really “unsustainable” is their socialist agenda and the supporting government for it. But it doesn’t look like anyone will address that problem soon enough.

Right on the heals of AOC’s statement, Bernie says Elizabeth Warren may be a “capitalist in her bones, but I’m not.” Nope, he’s a commie and past the socialist garden long ago. But he has it exactly backwards. Socialism only benefits few ringmasters, the puppet masters. It is meant to be a transformational thing — to our politics and economy. And they don’t really care about the dire consequences on either of them.

In a few years it will be “the day the music died” — her music and Bernie’s pied piper tune. I’m also wondering if she could be a poltergeist?

It is us who are in the real fight to save ourselves and country from the doom and gloom of AOC and her tribe of commie buddies. That’s a challenge. Why does that thought of someone calling AOC a mom bother me so much?

So maybe I have a little surprise for AOC and her commie pals. There are some things we ain’t ever going to see. And your socialist plans are right at the top of the list.

Morality of the Beast

It’s a strange new world, and the religion of the left has taken center stage.

AOC lectures us about the morality of Climate Change, while they joyfully push for late-term abortion even infanticide as hard as they can. But we are the deniers?

Reality check! Toto, we’re not in Kansas anymore.
Politics of evil.

Right Ring | Bullright

Climate Of Religion

What we have seen is the overt politicization, weaponization and religiosity of the climate, or climate change, and the propagandizing of it. It should be no surprise that they politicized it to the max. That’s why so many people are outraged. But that was only the first step. Then they weaponize the climate, against the people of course.

Then they use the climate as the apocalyptic fear-mongering vehicle

When even the former head of Green Peace has to go on Hannity and call out the apocalypse hysteria of the Left, we are in a strange place.

He actually said that if we do the fossil full elimination they are calling for, it would decimate civilization. Or maybe that is what they want? He also said that our coal fired consumption is about 90% cleaner than it was decades ago.

But he said that today we still rely on fossil fuels for 80% of our electricity. Apparently they didn’t realize that when they tell us they want to switch to electric cars. Imagine the reaction when they all plug them in.

But they are telling us something with these Big Green Plans. They show us it is a religious movement now, full stop. The former Green Peace guy said what they are doing in incorporating kids into their message is equal to child abuse. Well, it should be criminal. The same person also said that the direction they are taking it, including using children (and emotions), is just to push their radical socialism or social justice platform.

I guess they don’t realize that we see exactly what they are doing. They turned it into a political issue, weaponized it, then made it a religious one. And they now feel comfortable turning that weapon on anyone they need to propel their political agenda.

Wouldn’t you think using and scaring kids would be a bit over the top? Not for them. In fact, it is right up their alley. The same way they have been using kids in their socialized healthcare schemes. Just roll out the children. What’s next, having children lobby and protest for late term abortion rights? Don’t be surprised.

As I said some time ago: is there anything too radical and extreme even for Democrats? Not anymore. Remember Claire McKaskill let the dirty secret out of the bag in the campaign, before she lost? She said those are the crazy Democrats and she was not one of them. But now that the election is over and AOC has taken over the party, with an assist from Bernie Sanders, it looks like they are telling us loud and clear that really all Dems are crazy Democrats. That’s the way it works.

We used to hear them say on the campaign that they would not be a lockstep vote, and they were independent minded, and that they would represent the people. Remember Trump called them out at rallies and said if they get in, they will only be Pelosi puppets and vote in lockstep. Rubber stamps. Again, Trump was completely right. But it only took a few short weeks for that to happen and prove it.

Bottom line is these people are not at all about preventing a catastrophe, they are all about creating one. And the faster they get there, the better. Have kids believe that the world is going to incinerate. We used to hide under desks in schools, remember. Now just tell them it is over. So we might as well blow through a hundred trillion dollars trying because it’s a lost cause unless. Unless they can save planet earth from destruction. Well, I wonder what kept planet earth from destruction years ago before they came along? They sort of sound like a revised version of Heaven’s Gate people over the Hale-Bopp Comet.

It does show us something. That the climate change and socialists, besides getting in bed with each other, are reading from the same script. It is all about belief. It is only based on that. Throw in a few anecdotes and current events to make your case, then round up the kids and give them their lines. Send them out to the public and watch people get sucked in. Or so goes the plan. However, what it really is based on is belief.(echoes of Obama) Have enough people to believe it and you can even summon a Hale-Bopp comet to come and rescue them. And they are betting all their marbles, and our money, on it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Music And Politics Sitting In A Tree

But let me start off with a made to order joke. Bless their little young hearts.

Sometimes I get a kick out of young people today, their naiveté still intrigues me. Even though they often seem ignorant of basic history. That is not all their fault.

So one day I was in a fast food place. The employees were having this discussion about the upcoming 50th anniversary of Woodstock. I couldn’t help listening because I was not doing anything except standing there waiting for my order.

All three of the guys were fairly young, and the only women was about middle-aged. She appeared to be schooling them on Woodstock, odd as that seemed to me at the time.

Then the one young guy ask her impatiently “well, was Hip Hop going on then, too, were they doing that?” I couldn’t resist cutting in to say, “they hadn’t even put those two words together yet” and I chuckled. They all looked at me with their upper wheels turning.

I looked at the guy who asked and said “ Man, they barely knew what rock and roll was back then. They were still breaking it in.” But then I saw his big eyes and knew that went right over his knowledge base and sailed into the deep. I smiled and walked away.

Dummy me, I thought maybe a joke would illustrate the point and further their discussion. But instead it ended it and left me wondering if it was my delivery that failed? And if it was some generational thing I crossed? At least I thought it was funny, they will probably never know if it was true, funny… or both?

Joined At The Hip

Say what you will about the original Woodstock which stole headlines some 5 decades ago this year. Those discussions are still going on, as I can testify. Organizers are planning a 50th anniversary to the Woodstock concert this year. But déjà vu all over again.

The original site in Bethel, NY has plans for an anniversary to memorialize the Max Yasgur Farm concert in ’69 and has already booked one top headliner, Carlos Santana.

But Michael Lang, one of the original promoters, has planned what he claims is the only original sanctioned anniversary celebration, which he announced will be in Watkins Glen, NY. In that one, political activism and sustainability will be a central theme for the event. And no doubt for the “woke” as well.

Not only is he drafting top talent, but also encouraging their political activism for the event too. So is this where Farm Aide and Woodstock exchange vows and officially tie the knot, joined in a river of political activism? No matter what the location, it will be billed as Utopia. Who knows if the National Anthem will even be allowed in this one? (old reference to Jimmie Hendrix) Or if maybe the Black Bloc and Antifa will do security for the event?

Take it from Lang himself: (CBS News January 11, 2019)

The festival will also evoke its predecessor through activism, with sustainability efforts and screenings, panels and art installations by non-profit organizations. “The Woodstock 50th Anniversary will be about sharing an experience with great artists and encouraging people to get educated and involved in the social issues impacting everyone on the planet,” said Lang.

“”We want this to be more than just coming to a concert,” Lang told The New York Times. “And hopefully a lot of the bands will become part of this effort to get people to stand up and make themselves heard, to get out [and] vote. And if they don’t have a candidate that represents their feelings, to find one — or to run themselves.”

From coming to sexual awareness to coming to political wokeness. Is that where mud baths come in? Is it where the white rabbit has a coup over the enchanted forest?

Okay, so music, history, or anniversary may not be the real motivation here. Political priorities, you know. No word whether any of the up and comers in presidential candidates are booking the event. They could have hours of speeches to a captive audience if they go all out. How nostalgic would that be? I don’t recall that was the message of Woodstock but that was then and this is now. What better place to grease the skids for socialism?

And now, being the radicalized leftist culture it is, supposedly on the rise, I can see it “and now a word from our movement icon, Bernie Sanders.” To which the crowd roars to their feet and gives him a fifteen minute standing ovation.

That could only be followed by another speech from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez bringing home the Socialism message. And Michael Moore applauding waiting in the wings.

If you were one of the headliner bands, how on earth could you follow that bad acid trip? It also has me wondering what would be the definition of “success” for such a grand event? I guess you measure it in political success and, of course, by fundraising totals.

So Woodstock….you are finally 50, now how about growing the f*** up?

Right Ring | Bullright

New Oil Discovery

Now we’re talking. Let’s see Obama take credit for this, since he can’t block it.

Largest Oil and Gas Reserves Ever Assessed Found in West Texas

Breitbart — by Merrill Hope  —  Dec 7, 2018

The U.S. Department of the Interior announced Thursday the Permian Basin’s Wolfcamp shale and Bone Spring formation spanning parts of West Texas and eastern New Mexico hold the largest potential oil and gas resources ever discovered. Federal surveyors note the Bone Spring plays could offer roughly seven times the amount of oil as the Bakken shale in North Dakota.

In a new assessment, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated these untapped regions in the Delaware Basin of the Permian contained 46.3 billion barrels of oil, 281 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 20 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, more than two times larger than its 2016 assessment of the Wolfcamp shale play in the Permian’s Midland Basin.

“Christmas came a few weeks early this year,” said U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke in a prepared statement. “American strength flows from American energy, and as it turns out, we have a lot of American energy.” Zinke added, “Before this assessment came down, I was bullish on oil and gas production in the United States. …../

More: https://www.breitbart.com/border/2018/12/07/largest-oil-and-gas-reserves-ever-assessed-found-in-west-texas/

If liberals cannot find grounds to condemn the news, then they’ll go out of their way to ignore it. But they won’t be happy because these days all that excites them is doom.

Yet they wonder why we need pipelines and infrastructure development for it. Or they will be back to talking about taking over and socializing oil companies.

I figure the next thing is if Dems can’t find ways to block any good news, or turn it rotten, they’ll try to tax it somehow. It could be called the “good news tax”. I wouldn’t doubt it.

US Largest Global Crude Producer

Now here is something the left probably never wanted to be number one at.

San Antonio Business Journal

Sep 12, 2018, 2:46pm CDT Updated 2 days ago Production in the nation’s shale basins has helped the U.S. surpass Russia and Saudi Arabia to become the world’s largest crude oil producer, preliminary figures from the Energy Information Administration show.

American exploration and production companies are now producing an estimated 10.9 million barrels of crude oil per day, according to the EIA’s latest Short-Term Energy Outlook report released on Wednesday. Based on preliminary data, EIA officials believe that crude oil production in the U.S. surpassed Saudi Arabia in February and surpassed Russia twice — once in June and again in August.

The figures mark the first time that domestic crude oil production has surpassed Saudi Arabia in more than two decades. Although the EIA does not publish crude oil production forecasts for Russia and Saudi Arabia, the agency expects that U.S. crude oil production will continue to exceed that of Russia and Saudi Arabia through 2019.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2018/09/12/united-states-now-the-largest-global-crude-oil.html

Oops, the energy denier crowd is not going to like that. The second part of the oil issue is why the rise in gas prices? Now that sanctions will be back on Iran, it will be another excuse for higher oil prices. Though when they dropped Iran sanctions, the only beneficiary was Iran and a few of its trading partners. Of course on the left they would enjoy sky high gas and energy prices. At least for the time being congrats to US anyway.

MSM ignores any real news to beat the Russian Bear

Holding fast to conspiracy narratives pushed by Hillary Clinton (and her campaign of trolls) on Russia meddling, misogyny, racism that cheated her out of her destined Ovalating Office. Unfortunately, she is right, that media will follow her lead every time. While she and the entrenched media establishment are baited and trolled by Russia. They would take career Russian propagandists word or version of events over Trump’s almost every time.

It’s really easy if you are in the Kremlin hell-bent on sowing discord in America. If destroying credibility in American institutions is their goal, then the Left hands them a victory flag. So even when Trump goes to Poland to make a classical academic defense of western civilization, especially then, they have a collective panic attack and cannot recover. But intensive care could not treat their disease.

Then came his next trip to France with liberal Macron, their macaroni boy of Paris they fell for head first. This time MSM decided to downplay coverage of the visit ignoring most of the ceremony, except the presser to push Russia questions. Even the centennial of WWI and France’s Bastile Day got marginal coverage. Jake Tapper called it just a photo-op for Trump. Right a 100 year anniversary is just a photo-op , world history just gets in the way. After all, that is the way they see it.

So now, once again, another historical marker pops up that media seems too preoccupied with Russian propaganda to notice — or give due diligence to. It’s like you have this Russian spy novel playing out in the background to obfuscate any real news.

US Has Produced More Oil Than Saudi Arabia For 4 Straight Years [GRAPH]

Daily Caller

Saudi Arabia has lagged the U.S. in oil production for the last four years, according to federal data compiled by University of Michigan economist Mark Perry.

Perry created a chart Saturday showing just how far behind Saudi oil production has trailed U.S. production. Rising U.S. production combined with OPEC policies drove crude oil prices down to new lows. Monday, a barrel of oil costs $46.26, while the same barrel would have sold for $109.04 in June 2014.

U.S. oil production, on the other hand, is increasing. The U.S. imported about 60 percent of its oil in 2007, but by 2014, the country only imported 27 percent of its oil — the lowest level since 1985. Rising oil production has reduced demand for Saudi oil abroad too, keeping prices low.

Saudi Arabia can likely handle cheap oil better than other Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) nations, but cheap oil is still devastating the country.


Read at Daily Caller

And yet they wonder why we call MSM Fake News? Everything positive — as they define it — about their messiah’s golden throne was heralded from the mountaintops to make sure it echoed to anyone. It was unavoidable. They ran his Saturday addresses to tout all the great, but invisible, good news. It was good because they said so. Job numbers, even when bad, were called good. Or, as the Bible says, “those who call evil good and good evil.” And it worked, or saturated the airwaves to a point no one else could be heard.

Spending, national debt, budget issues. Remember Obamafiles claimed he halved the budget ‘deficit’ to cover the 2o trillion dollar explosion. The fairy dust worked, put some lipstick on that pig and sell it like the sweety-pie lie it is. He depleted the military, and budget, but who cares about that thing? All is good, they said. ‘These are the good times.’ Never mind that you did not see or feel it. You weren’t alone though. Most didn’t, still you had to listen to regurgitated talking points of how great things were going.

No, we weren’t wrong. Our instincts were not misguided. We weren’t misinformed. We were not too stupid to understand. We were not uneducated halfwits. We were just being constantly lied to on such a level, to such a degree, that Americans never were subjected to before. Even low information voters knew something was wrong. Economists, real ones that is, were not impressed. But even they had a hard time getting any information out. It was all being blurred, blotted out, and intentionally drown out by the so-called good news coming directly from, and being dictated by, the White House.

But it was all good in those days and there were no questions to ask, because no questions were necessary. Just report the White House talking points, life was easy for reporters. Obama would even tell press what stories they think should be covered, and what stories they didn’t think deserved time.

Guess what happened?

Remember Benghazi, IRS, Lois Lerner, or Fast and Furious? Leading from behind was actually a defense strategy they could get behind. Meaningless red lines were all the rage. Russian intervention? It really is not intervention when you are inviting them into Syria and altering your national policy to their liking and getting nothing in return. Of course that is not intervention. That is failed US leadership like we never experienced before either. It was complicit failure. Now they are paranoid about intervention? They opened the door, invited them in, coalesced with them. Is it any surprise Russia wasn’t the greatest or most respectful house guests, when Obama shows no respect for our own house?

Then, to top it all off, when Obama left he had them all declare that he had a completely scandal-free administration, not even a little one. Remember that? So it was an insult on reason and intelligence. It was a fraud. Obamacare was created, built and sold on lies. They named it the Affordable Care Act.

The article above, while it is good news to be ignored under Trump, will likely be co-opted for propaganda value by Obamafiles — who are just as active outside the Office as they were in the White House. So they are quite anxiuos to take credit for anything good. It is what they do. Though our growth and oil business in particular was in spite of Obama’s war on energy, not because of it. But that doesn’t stop them from laying claim.

Anyone dishonest enough to prop up Obama’s regime for 8 years is certainly going to use any dirty trick to that end, to credit Obama with a net positive. A guy like Obama that never had to live under or feel the effect of his own policies. Calling evil good was quite popular, getting even easier with practice. It was instant revision everywhere.

So now that we have oil production growth, who do you think can find fault with our achievement? That’s right, the same people who will gladly try to lay credit to it. But the Left’s “green” team will condemn it as a negative. Oil, fossil fuels is bad juju. Which is why we knew Obama was never supportive to the industry. Yet he wants credit? In your dreams, Obama. And if America was not as innovative, like we’ve always been, this could not have happened. Certainly it was nothing Obama had a hand in.

However, we shouldn’t be afaid to admit good news, because some of it took place under Obama’s tyranny. It began and was under way before him. Like Clinton had the benefit of the tech boom. But Obama did about everything he could to step on it.

Under Trump, all good news will be summarily buried, or tortured by Obama revisionists if it refuses stay in the hole. Since the Left controls the media, that is the way it is. And whatever they can tie to Obama’s Legacy of Lies, they will. Memory Lane is not a place I’d want to live, if I were Obama

RightRing | Bullright

Sneak attacks from Paris Accord train

I read this op-ed in the NYT, preferred toilet tissue for those in the know. However, it does pay to see what they say once in a while, even with a jaundice eye and flexing eyebrows.

The Times Editorial Board describes Trump’s jump off the Paris Accord train as “America in Retreat.” But then it does it while a terrorist attack goes down in London. See there is no time that is not a good time to attack Trump. And that is all it was.

You would think it might be laced with the benefits of staying in the Paris Accord. No, it was only a criticism for leaving it. How dare you. But it failed to mention any benefits that we would get out of it.

Sure, we know the world gains from US being in it. They want our money. Another Globul scheme that we will chiefly fund. Excuse me, aren’t we having those problems in other world organizations? So no painful losses for us bailing out of the latest Globul scheme.

Their biggest point was that we are shirking, or ceding, our leadership by fleeing from it. That’s the big problem, and that is reprehensible to their ideological view.

We just got rid of a president who believed in leading from behind, who was all for this agreement, but somehow we are foregoing our leadership by withdrawing? In all his twisted foreign policy failures, Obama never once put America first and certainly did not prove his theory correct. He gained nothing from all the apologies he spouted from Cairo to Russia. Yet now we are abandoning our leadership position? Even at home he did not put the will of the people or our priorities first. Instead, he set his priorities of green energy first at the expense of everything else, and wasted countless millions on programs that didn’t work or went belly up, along with our money. Then he branded it a success.

(NYT) Still, Mr. Trump and his team, embroiled in controversy over Russia and other matters, have shown no inclination, much less skill, to do the hard thinking that must precede any decision to alter America’s role in the world.

So right on the heels of having given the world a tragedy of an Iran deal, which benefited Iran, Obama headed straight down his homestretch to get into a Paris Deal that offered nothing but another giant expense for us. That, he claimed, was leadership. Setting up any global slush fund is now called leadership — the bigger the better.

But we were always supposed to be cautious of foreign entanglements that threaten our sovereignty. That is exactly why Obama and the left like to dabble in them so much.

Perfect example: it didn’t take long, when Trump was contemplating the withdraw from the Paris accord, for media and press to ramp up means that you would not have thought possible. Yes, they insisted that to withdraw from the Paris treaty — can we now at least call it that — was, in fact, a threat to our sovereignty. Oh yes they did! Every reason we gave for withdrawing they tried to reverse to make it a reason we should stay in it.

The exact opposite of their rhetoric was true. It was a treaty masquerading as an executive order. If it was so popular they would have had no problem getting Senate approval, which they wouldn’t do because it would not pass. It was the same Constitutional principle they avoided on the Iran deal. Yet they went ahead and did it anyway.

Now they claim we are giving up our sovereignty by withdrawing. But no one explains why that is true, just like they don’t explain all the benefits of staying in. Other countries had to do nothing. So they, namely the left, are angry because there is no replacement for our funding. Their claim is that without us in the treaty everyone else is going to reap the benefits now. But they were the ones who were going to benefit anyway.

It is just one more deal which doesn’t consider America’s priorities. Yet they lie and say getting out does not preserve our priorities, it threatens them. Then there is Democrats’ universal closing argument for everything that “people are going to die.”

Ironically, the only thing that seems to usurp media’s attacks on Trump are intermittent terrorist attacks that the world has no immediate answers to. So maybe if their Paris plan was framed as a terrorist plot, would they finally see the error in it — or at least the drawbacks? Or probably not even that would alter their Globul perspective. It’s futile.

RightRing | Bullright

Westinghouse down but not out

Forbes
James Conca , | Contributor

Westinghouse Bankruptcy Shakes The Nuclear World

On Wednesday, Westinghouse Electric Company filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy in New York to restructure itself as a result of costly problems at the AP1000 power plants it’s building in Georgia and South Carolina.

Westinghouse has obtained $800 million in debtor-in-possession financing from a third-party lender to help fund and protect its core businesses during this reorganization.

Its Japanese parent company, Toshiba, declared that its nuclear power business has already lost $6 billion, which could go up to $10 billion, and is seeking ways to limit its liability. Toshiba shares have lost over $7 billion in market value this fiscal year.

Westinghouse selected the Shaw Group, led by James Bernhard Jr., to spearhead construction. Bernhard, a wheeler and dealer, ../

In the meantime, Westinghouse turned to a real nuclear construction contractor, Fluor Corporation, to get the nuclear plants back on track, but it is too early to tell how successful they will be. Even with the cost overruns and delays, these reactors should get completed and they should still have lower life-cycle costs than renewables or new coal.

More: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/03/31/westinghouse-bankruptcy-shakes-the-nuclear-world/#10d7370f2688

It’s unclear to this simple laymen why they originally would have gone with the nuke-upstart Shaw Group? A big company like Westinghouse and Toshiba…like shouldn’t they have seen this coming? On the other hand Fluor — a company even I worked under a short time — is an old standard, and dependable.

Why did it take them so long, and make it so costly, to turn to them? Just seems they were out to cut corners(costs) from the beginning and got burned. What else explains it? Plus some inner-industry ego rivalry. Now they’ll pay for their errors.

But then the way media were starting to report the story as if Westinghouse was finished. And likely it will be spun into an anti-nuclear power story, which it is not if you read this report. In fact, nuclear energy should be enjoying a resurgence. Thanks Westinghouse-Toshiba [sarcasm], you didn’t do the sector any favors.

Climate Change cluster-muck

Bernard Goldberg has written a stimulating column on the Papal pronouncements, albeit endorsement, of Global Warming and Climate Change.

He argues against the Pope getting involved in the politics. So has Jeb Bush insinuated he does not march to that tune. Here’s an excerpt of the column hoping others check it out.

Liberals will love that message too. But here comes the uh oh alert. This was also in the encyclical on global warming: “Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion. How can we genuinely teach the importance of concern for other vulnerable beings, however troublesome or inconvenient they may be, if we fail to protect a human embryo, even when its presence is uncomfortable and creates difficulties?”

I’m guessing liberals weren’t too happy with that part. But abortion is also a moral issue at the core of the church’s teaching. And so is gay marriage and to some extent, Bruce Jenner too.

– See more at: http://bernardgoldberg.com/the-pope-global-warming-and-the-elusive-meaning-of-morality/

No Bernard, right, he is not going to lose sleep that you aren’t buying the snake oil.

A message from CFact

China’s rise

China’s development is astounding.

India, Brazil and other nations hope to copy it.

There are many tragic flaws when international global warming agreements are penned. Among the worst is the willingness of the leaders of the West to turn a blind eye to how useless their economy-wrecking global warming policies are when considered in a global context.China coal use

While President Obama is waging war on coal and oil, China is building coal plants as fast as it possibly can. Chinese coal use is poised to surpass the entire rest of the world’s use of coal combined.

China and the other so-called “BRIC” nations are more than happy to step up as the developed world steps down, and will happily produce the goods that our escalating energy costs and regulatory burden make too expensive to produce at home.

President Obama’s recent global warming deal with China is totally one-sided. The U.S. committed to capping emissions (and damaging the economy) now, while China has until 2030 to maybe, if they feel like it, consider capping emissions then. 2030 is when China projects its emissions will peak in any event.

This deal was naive.

Meanwhile, global warming regulations will drive up prices for Americans, while any miniscule effect on emissions is dwarfed by China’s increase.

cement consumption USGSConsider this astonishing fact that Bill Gates blogged about and the Washington Post picked up:

China used more cement in the last three years, than the U.S. did in the entire 20th century!

That’s how fast China is expanding.
Sure, five percent of human greenhouse gas emissions are attributed to cement (if emissions are your thing), but what that tremendous growth really tells us is that global warming policies that depress the economy may advance the agendas of the developed world’s warming-Left, but will have no real impact on global emissions.

If you think Obama’s deal with China was bad, just wait to see what he’s prepared to sign at the big UN climate conference in Paris this December.

The need to educate the public has never been greater.

For nature and people too,

Craig Rucker
Executive Director

P.S.   China’s rapid, massive industrialization is exactly the kind of crucial fact that global warming pressure groups do not want discussed in the context of climate.  Sign the petition to stop climate censorship.  Share it with as many people as possible.  There is too much at stake to allow the warming-Left to muzzle speech and hide the facts.

How China used more cement
in 3 years than the U.S. did
in the entire 20th Century

Cement

Source: USGS, Cement Statistics USGS, mineral industry of China

Read the facts at the Washington Post

and from Bill Gates

I admit what got my attention was the amount of cement China used. Tell-tale signs of a country under construction. But take a look at that picture, it is astounding.

Let that mental image sink in with the concrete facts. Just incredible, isn’t it?

Strange benefits become problems

Oil, oil everywhere and not a place to put it. That is the state of the coming problem analysts see headed for us. Well, there could be worse problems to have.

According to a writer for Motley Fool, they have a prediction for gas prices this summer you might not dislike.

Why Gas Could Plunge Below $2 a Gallon This Summer

Rising oil inventories in the U.S. could lead to sharply lower prices at the pump this summer.

Travis Hoium Mar 26th 2015 | Daily Finance

The price of gasoline has plunged 30 percent in the past year to $2.45 a gallon nationwide, giving major relief to American consumers. Plunging oil prices have driven the drop and have given a reprieve to consumers who have been paying nearly $4 a gallon for gas for most of the past four years.
But the discount on gasoline may not be over. Just as the summer driving season approaches, drivers may get another reprieve. This time, the oil boom that is driving the U.S. toward energy independence could backfire and provide a massive discount on gas for consumers. Within a few months, we may be below $2 a gallon again.

Read more at Daily Finance>

So we are in for a summer of surprise, that at least has more credibility than Obama’s summer of recovery that never came. But I’m sure Obama will find a way to personalize this to his credit, at the same time warning of Climate Change Armageddon.

Classic hypocrisy and flip-flopping

Anyone who can see knows Ed stood with big unions supporting the pipeline, then he bailed and now is its biggest critic. In fact, he turns it into a litmus test for the left. Hypo-101.

Ed Schultz, Who Flipped on Keystone, Slams Dems for Being ‘Bought’

By Scott Whitlock | January 29, 2015 | News Busters

A furious Ed Schultz on Thursday raged over the fact that only 36 Senate Democrats opposed the Keystone pipeline in a vote. Nine defections contributed to the bill passing the Senate. Schultz sneered, “But what a sad moment for Democrats if they’re concerned about climate change…The Democrats can be bought.”

Senators Bob Casey (Pennsylvania), Thomas Carper (Delaware) and Michael Bennet (Colorado) reversed themselves on past opposition and voted yes. The cable host isn’t really in a position to judge Democrats for changing their position on Keystone due to pressure, considering he did exactly the same thing.

On February 5, 2014, Schultz stood up for Keystone, lecturing viewers, “…The hard cold truth is the United States is an oil and gas dependent country and we’re going to be for the foreseeable future.”

On his February 7, 2014 radio show, Schultz was the receiving end of liberal “shouting”:

SCHULTZ: There’s one thing I’ve learned this week is that liberals can be just as mean as conservatives. I hate to say that, I hate to report that, but it is just I find it absolutely amazing, the all-or-nothing crowd is out and about for my head because of the pipeline story.

More> Newsbusters

This is almost too funny, a year and a complete 180. So someone convinced him of the proper side he must be on. But he’s now the attack dog against any defectors. See how supporting a thing like a pipeline can make you a Democrat defector?

Being “bought” is such an absurd charge. Actually it is Democrats/liberals (progressives) like Schultz that are bought lock, stock and barrel. He just illustrated it. Evidently,  he learned the full lesson about mean liberals. So much for “hard cold truth”.

Related: The Hill — 4/11/14:
Union threatens retribution for House Dems opposing Keystone

Death of a price point

Now with the death of Saudi King Abdullah, the flurries of questions began. What about the oil market, prices in particular, and what effect new leadership will mean for oil?

Well, complex answers don’t stop reporters from asking, except maybe in the case of Obama. The go to man is apparently Prince Alwaleed. He gave a robust defense of supply and demand, then shocked probably even OPEC countries by declaring we will never see triple digit oil again. In fact, he said we will never see hundred-dollar oil prices again.

See CNBC for video and article: http://www.cnbc.com/id/102363511

“I can assure you that Saudi Arabia is not using the oil price right now to impact the fracking industry in the United States,” he said, adding that “there’s an oversupply and demand is not so high.”

He insists there will be little change on current oil policy from a King Salaman government. He does have a grasp of understanding about the subject. It’s obviously true the current prices do hurt the Kingdom. It also hurts other oil-dependent countries. But his point was if they cut production that “gap” would only be filled by some other country. And it would. So it seems their production level alone is not running the market. The dynamics indeed have shifted since the US began producing more.

Now there’s one voice on the record publicly declaring the death of triple digit oil. That in itself should be a big deal. So stick a fork in hundred-dollar oil?

What a bunch of Keystone BS

Here is the link to a State Dep briefing where they were asked about the ongoing Keystone decision. One where the State Dep is to issue its decision, based on 8 federal agencies input.

To all the questions, Jen Psaki keeps reiterating “the process” and that they will not know anything until the input is in. But she said they could not say how long it would take to receive that input because a timeline is not established yet. Getting all that?
Example: (Friday, January 9, 2014 (sic) typo 2015)

MS. PSAKI: Well, there are several components of the review. The agency input is not something that we have at this point to review. /…

MS. PSAKI: Well, Matt, we’ll obviously move to the next stage of this –…
— which is certainly what we expected, which is receiving the input of the eight agencies. That’s the stage we’ll be at, and we’ll see the process through.

Well, in the meantime, the Congress — which is a branch of the government after all — has said it is going to proceed to put out a bill on Keystone. While King Obama promptly said he would veto such a Keystone bill.

So let’s get this straight. State is saying the process is going as planned, and will continue, in order to make the decision on Keystone. The president has issued a veto notice, while they are still in their deliberation process, awaiting input. Mind you they are federal agencies, acting under an Executive Order Obama issued, that will submit their input on the Keystone decision. Sound like the shell game they play down on the corner?

Since it is far from complete, and they don’t have the input, but Obama has announced he would veto a Keystone XL bill, now what kind of input would you expect from these federal agencies? Is there any surprise here, is the fix in? Could it be a glowing approval?

Really, they can discuss it with a straight face as if the “process” must be allowed to play out to make the decision. “We’ll see the process through.” Obama already said he would veto it. What a nice tip of the hand from the White House to the agencies prior to their input. Still they play this game as if some credible, independent process is making the decision. Want to bet which side the feedback comes down on? Just a hunch…

QUESTION: The fact that the President has said he’s going to veto whatever Congress does, does that affect the review at all?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think the White House has spoken to this. But regardless of the ruling, the House bill and their review still conflicts – and our view, the Administration’s view – with longstanding Executive Branch procedures regarding the authority of the President. That’s why they’ve indicated – or my colleague over at the White House indicated earlier this week what the President’s intentions would be.

We’re continuing this process. We’ll see it through. And that’s where we are at this point in time.

If you really want to see logic and reason tortured you can read the full exchange.

RightRing | Bullright

Oil dip continues – mounting effects

More on the collateral damage of declining oil. The theme continues.

Enterprise Halts Plan for Bakken Oil Pipeline as Prices Collapse

By Robert Tuttle and Lynn Doan | Dec 12, 2014 | Bloomberg

Enterprise Products Partners LP (EPD), the second-largest midstream company in the U.S., canceled plans for a pipeline delivering Bakken oil to Oklahoma amid plunging oil prices and competing pipeline projects.

There wasn’t enough interest from potential shippers to go ahead with the project, Houston-based Enbridge said in a statement today. The line would have carried 340,000 barrels of Bakken a day to the Cushing, Oklahoma, storage hub from North Dakota starting in 2016.

U.S. crude futures have fallen 37 percent in the past three months to a five-year low of $57.81 a barrel today amid a surge of U.S. output. The Independent Petroleum Association of America warned last month that crude producers in the Bakken shale region and other tight-oil plays will probably trim output next year because of the price drop. True Companies, Hiland Partners and Energy Transfer Partners LP (ETP) are among those developing pipeline projects to move more Bakken to market.

Enterprise’s decision is “not really surprising, given the other competing pipeline projects that are under way to delivery oil out of the Bakken,” Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates LLC in Houston, said by telephone today. “In totality, all of these pipelines add about another 1 million barrels a day of takewaway capacity out of the Bakken, which really makes the Enterprise project questionable.”

Bakken crude has traded at an average discount to U.S. benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude of $5.38 a barrel over the past year, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The discount reflects the costs of transporting the crude from North Dakota to refineries. The oil was assessed at $52.56 a barrel today, $5.25 below WTI.

North Dakota’s Bakken formation supplies more than 1 million barrels of oil a day. At the end of last year, there was pipeline space for about 583,000 barrels a day of it. That’s forecast to grow to 773,000 by the end of this year and to as much as 1.7 million barrels a day by the end of 2017, according to the state’s Pipeline Authority.

Oil that can’t be shipped by pipeline is sent in rail cars, at a cost of $10 to $15 a barrel. [Bloomberg]

The reporters: Robert Tuttle in Calgary; Lynn Doan in San Francisco

See related video Bloomberg – “Oil’s Slide: Is it a good or bad thing?”
oil settles

Oil illusions and/or delusions – pt 2

(Part 2)
What is interesting is that for years we heard the Mid East production level adjustments, such as OPEC’s or Saudis’, had little to do with the price we were paying for refined goods. When we complained in general about high oil prices, we were told their decisions and production had really no effect on overall prices. We are always reminded that supply and demand are driving those prices. It’s the hidden hand of the economy.

But now we have a situation where Saudis are actively flooding the market with their oil to drive oil prices down, which makes it hard for others to do business. So are they now admitting Saudis’ production control has an effect on prices? Yes, they are. Flashback to all those times we were told it was only consumer demand, no foul. We were imagining things. Remember, they said the free market was setting those prices. Which is it?

Apparently, someone woke them up and told them the power they have over oil prices. Who let that out of the bag? Do you think it took them all these years to realize it? And took our domestic fracking ability and development to show them? Anyway, now they know the dirty little secret and are using it against us to curb our ability to produce.

Here is a newer article examining the issue that Saudis are at war with our domestic production. He compares this reaction to the subprime bubble, and presumably meltdown, as the perfect analogy.

As soon as oil’s price headed in the undesired direction in this highly leveraged market, the dreams evaporated, just as they did in the highly leveraged housing market. The debt of the most indebted producers, now losing money, is worth less than face value. Their creditors will eventually recognize losses. As previously noted, the one wrinkle is that so many producers are governments. They have not, in most cases, explicitly backed their debt with oil revenues, but they had assumed those revenues and based their future spending plans on them. Call it “soft” debt. — Robert Gore; straightlinelogic

Long ago I figured if Saudis’ had real fear about Iran, they could put pressure on the market and oil prices, which Iran is dependent on. This would have the effect of sanctions. Maybe this is what they did, or maybe they are only reacting to us? If we listen to these economists, Saudis are responding namely to us.

I admit having a bias that I prefer to buy gas below 3.00 to paying about 4.00 per/gallon. (or at 2.00) At 4.00 per/gallon, the fracking is more profitable. So am I supposed to be happy knowing they are producing and growing, and just pay 4 dollars and shut up?

I realize how much high prices affect the whole economy. So that works in favor of my bias for lower prices. Am I to say: our economy is sputtering and people can’t afford the high costs… but at least we are producing more oil, thank goodness? I’m not there yet.

On the other hand, should I worry prices will decline so far the market will collapse to where no drilling is profitable? Well, I already heard one person put it this way: ‘you have to produce something before it is consumed.’ IOW, oil must be profitable to be produced, so we can consume it — in all its forms. If it is not, we will not have it available.

But in that case, prices would go up due to lacking supply, per supply and demand.

Here is an interesting article about the scoreboard

Biggest Winners and Losers of International Oil Price Crash

By Isaac Arnsdorf Dec 4, 2014 | Bloomberg

Oil prices around the world have fallen more than 38 percent since the year’s high in June.

Among the winners are airlines, which are saving on fuel and not reducing fares for customers. Bank of America Corp. predicts earnings will gain 73 percent in 2015.

Saudi Arabia flexed its muscle at November’s OPEC meeting by overruling other members, showing that it’s still the dominant producer. The desert kingdom needs oil at $83.60 a barrel to balance its budget, according to the International Monetary Fund, but it’s got $736 billion in reserves.

Apollo Global Management LLC, the New York buyout firm run by billionaire Leon Black, announced the sale of shale driller Athlon Energy Inc. on Sept. 29 — before oil dropped 29 percent.

More on Bloomberg

See the list of winners and losers. Saudis need 83.60 and currently it is below that, though they have substantial revenues.(they should) Iran needs 117. And we know that OPEC members cheat on quotas anyway. They probably want to sell what they can even at a lower price. But I don’t see articles about the negative effects to them.

I know it’s a complex issue. Yes, lower prices are hurting the producers, like fracking and development. It is in Saudis interest that we decrease our production.I understand the price declines are undermining fracking. Hey, there’s an angle for the enviro-gurus. They should favor lower prices. Though judging market effects as either good or bad is tougher. And motives can be almost as hard.

[My past article]

RightRing | Bullright

Oil illusions and/or delusions

(Part 1 of 2)
I posted a piece on the current oil price decline. I could be wrong on my interpretation. Now that I think more about it, I just don’t know.

There are many different angles and factors in the issue. I decided to list some of the variables in an attempt to put the pieces on the table to get a full view, not to prove one view or another. I just thought it would be interesting to see the components.

Basically there is a view catching wide reporting that the decline in prices have hurt the domestic oil industry, and in particular Texas. Some reports describe it as a Saudi war on Texas. The narrative is that Saudis are flooding the market with oil with the intent to hurt our production, namely shale and fracking businesses, which are more cost intensive than cheaper Saudi oil.

A lot of people believe that and follow that line of reasoning. I’m not so sure. I wrote the previous piece off the cuff in reaction to a couple reports I saw getting widely spread. A few days later and I see more reports from economists with the same perspective. It has me wondering am I the lone person who questions that? Did I miss something or am I making a mistake, as sometimes happens? Am I too quick to jump to conclusions or is my bias getting in the way? There can be different opinions.

By nature some reports are kind of hard to understand and complicated anyway. But then I am no economist, and many of these people are degreed academics. I generally have some healthy skepticism and especially when I see piling on a theme. In the end, maybe there is no correct view, and maybe it cannot be seen in just one way.

Supply and demand. This is the talking point that we have heard most in the last 6 or so years. They claim it is market forces driving the high consumer prices we have seen, and actually come to accept as the new normal. This explanation is so institutionalized that we had countless investigations on higher oil prices only to be told it is just supply and demand. Those investigations don’t reveal any gimmickry, so we’re told, and no market manipulation. In fact, reports are no one can manipulate the industry. The very idea would be absurd.

There are investors and traders and hedge funds, oh my. We hear they are the ones to blame for prices. They call them speculators. They bid the prices up to higher levels. There is an awful lot of trading going on.

Cheap oil flooding the market. In the latest analysis the Saudis are leveraging their low cost oil by flooding the market in an attempt to lower costs, making higher cost production less profitable, if at all. This will stop the investment in these processes and stop the industry in its tracks. This is the point of the current reports.

Consumer demand. We will buy something at a marketable price. But in theory the higher the price is the less you will buy, or the less you want to buy it. As prices moderate or come down, you sell more of it. So even in a down economy people will buy just what is necessary, sometimes taking from other expenses. Especially at rising, or higher prices, other goods are affected because they have less money to spend. So people cut back in discretionary spending or luxury areas to offset the higher prices at the pump. Plus they cut use of the product in any ways they can. But other areas of the economy have to be affected because a bigger chunk of the money is going to a particular necessity. For instance less for clothes, food, and less disposable income.

Subsidized economies. Some countries subsidize certain areas of the economy. Many oil rich countries have lower consumer prices due to government subsidies. Some governments own or control the resources and depend on those resources for revenue to fund their government.They make budgets and decisions based on price projections.

Taxes. the money paid to gov’t on refined goods. Higher prices bring higher taxes.

OPEC, a group of oil rich nations allying to make adjustments en masse on production etc.They meet frequently to discuss their issues and concerns. (That I compare them to the Genovese crime family is neither here nor there — they are what they are) They can move or function as a bloc. They have a union concept working for them.

Oil companies, international or domestic, that produce and explore for resources. (Or if you are a card carrying leftist, the bad guys) Private companies in this country making decisions based on a bottom line profit margin, which employ many people. They are involved in production, transportation, refining, storage etc.

Government, involved in regulating, making regulation, protecting resources and assets. Also dispenses permits and approvals, and has oversight capability. It also collects revenues on the business models, as well as on consumer goods, such as refined products.

Retail businesses: Stores that sell finished goods directly to the public consumers.

Fracking and shale oil newer and higher cost drilling operations.

Cost – benefit analysis study of the benefits derived from the cost of materials and production, and projections or decisions based on those factors.

Industry and bulk users corporations and industry that use a particular commodity as basic in their business models. Airlines, freight, energy companies.

Speculators or investors and put hedge funds in this bracket. People or companies investing in oil based on its price fluctuation or performance over a period of time. People buying futures as in any other market, who hope to make a profit. (Such as Hilary’s pork belly futures)

Now, the idea is not to make some grand conclusion by these factors. Just say these are some relevant tangents in the overall picture.

RightRing | Bullright

Oil boom, doom and gloom

I have to take some disagreement with the general views in this piece.
So I’ll take some issue with it.

OPEC Messes With Texas

by Kristin Tate 28 Nov 2014 | Brietbart

It’s official: OPED has declared war on Texas gas and oil. During a meeting in Vienna yesterday, OPEC countries kept crude oil output targets unchanged. The policy is likely to cause trouble for U.S. oil production, much of which is conducted in Texas.

As to not lose market share to the American fracking boom, Saudi Arabia has inundated the U.S. with cheap oil. The intention is to push U.S. producers out of the market space.

Crude oil is currently selling for around $70 per barrel. At this rate, much U.S. drilling could become unprofitable. Leonid Fedun, oil tycoon and vice president of OAO Lukoil, said that some U.S.-based producers are at risk of becoming “victims of their own success,” according to Bloomberg News.

Fedun reportedly said, “In 2016, when OPEC completes this objective of cleaning up the American marginal market, the oil price will start growing again. The shale boom is on a par with the dot-com boom. The strong players will remain, the weak ones will vanish….The major strike is against the American market.”

Fracking helped transform Texas into an energy powerhouse. The process — which involves blasting water, sand, and other chemicals deep into the ground the bring up oil and gas — has allowed for cost-efficient oil extraction. Earlier this year, the Lone Star State was projected to produce 3.4 million barrels of oil by the end of 2014. If this threshold is met, Texas alone would likely outproduce every OPEC nation except for Saudi Arabia, the world’s cheapest oil producer.

To combat the competition posed by U.S. fracking, Saudi Arabia has flooded the market with cheap oil. So far they have been successful, wiping out “hundreds of billions of dollars in equity value from the market capitalization of U.S.-traded securities,” according to the Dallas Morning News. […\]

More: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/11/28/OPEC-Messes-With-Texas

Well, I don’t buy all that. As if lower prices hurt us not help us. The eye always has to be on the longer term. Not to be beholden to OPEC’s and Saudis’ agenda would be a good thing. We’ve been strictly reactionary too long.

Also break that down, the other people hurt by collapsing prices — which were over inflated to begin with — are Iran and Russia. Should we accommodate their wishes for higher prices? The market will drive costs down, with the right policy adjustments.

The expense of building our infrastructure was a big part of getting started. Now that is well under way. The cost curve in most things inevitably bends downward. But meanwhile, price reduction does break the bubble of conventional wisdom on oil — over the last six or so years. So those players are not happy.

I think it is a positive that OPEC has not cut production. Saudis know those high prices were helping Iran. I would hate to fall in line with the agenda of Russia and Iran.

If it is a “war”, let’s examine the other side’s motives for a minute. A war means that they, predominately socialist economies, are inflicting lower prices on us as a weapon. Do you remember price wars? Who benefits by those? So now we are worried about the lower prices of oil, because the prices of heating fuel oils are still high. Have you checked, too, the difference in prices between regular and upper grades of gas? I’ve seen 60 an 70 cents per/gal differences.High test is only where regular was months back. Since when are lowering prices a problem?

I’ve read elsewhere that at 65$ per/barrel fracking etc is still profitable. And Iran needs about 117 per/barrel to fund themselves.(part of which is their terrorism outreach) And the profit margin still appears to be there in the refined products.(crack spread [1]) Maybe its me, but I’d think our government poses a bigger threat to the industry(bottom line) than Saudis flooding us with cheap oil.

But the way it hurts those mostly socialistic economies is worse, in effect, than what we see here. The article mentions the mitigating factor, Texas is invested in much more than oil. Even in the Midwest there is a lot more to the economic story than oil prices. Contrast that with Mid East countries. They depend on oil revenue for everything. It pays their bills.

So who is hurting whom? Are we to believe they are intentionally hurting their own economies to spite themselves, just to make it harder on Texas, and the US, to carry out our policies? If they are, that is a competition(challenge) worth engaging in. We need to win in the end by not being hostage to their demands and desires. In the above thinking, I guess we owe a big thanks to Saudis and OPEC for propping up oil prices to help Texas, and develop our resources. In effect, that would mean we are cutting our throats by developing these resources. Thus, they want OPEC cuts and higher prices?

Note: “A crack spread measures the difference between the purchase price of crude oil and the selling price of finished products, such as gasoline and distillate fuel, that a refinery produces from the crude oil. Crack spreads are an indicator of the short-term profit margin of oil refineries because they compare the cost of the crude oil inputs to the wholesale, or spot, prices of the outputs (although they do not include other variable costs or any fixed costs). The 3:2:1 crack spread approximates the product yield at a typical U.S. refinery: for every three barrels of crude oil the refinery processes, it makes two barrels of gasoline and one barrel of distillate fuel.” –  eia.gov

RightRing | Bullright

2 faces of Landrieu – evolution in action

Is it a bird, or plane, or just Mary Landrieu on Keystone XL? — the pipeline to politics.
(The Hill)

“After she requested the vote Wednesday, both parties were able to agree on holding a vote Tuesday on bipartisan legislation that would force the Obama administration to allow the construction of the pipeline that would transport oil from Canadian tar sands to refineries along the Gulf Coast. The House is expected to pass the bill this week.”

Wednesday:

“If they want to take my name off, put somebody’s else name on it and pass it, so be it,” Landrieu said on the floor Wednesday. “I didn’t come here to see my name in lights.” — [humble, little ol’ Mary]

Thursday:

“When they call press conferences later today and declare victory, remember who actually brought this to the floor,” Landrieu said Thursday. “I’m the senator who came to this floor.”– [Proud Mary]