English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Put c-span1 on right now.

The democrats are trying to raise taxes to U.S. oil companies, without raising them on foreign ones.

Do they think the oil companies will just absorb that loss themselves? Do they not realize that will affect gas prices?

I thought they wanted to reduce our dependance on foreign oil?

2007-01-18 06:10:06 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

I am in every position to talk contradictions. I am pointing them out as they happen, and liberals REFUSE to look at them.

The (most) contradictions the liberals point out are items twisted around to appear to be contradictions.

2007-01-18 06:33:39 · update #1

10 answers

Does this mean that oil from overseas will be cheaper than domestic oil? If so, what stations receive the imported oil?

2007-01-18 06:19:19 · answer #1 · answered by By Your Command 6 · 0 0

They do (end the dependence of foreign oil) and that is why they are closing the loop hole that allows off shore drilling w/o royalty fee's. have you even read what this is about?

Newly empowered House Democrats sought to recoup billions of dollars in lost royalties from offshore drilling as they anticipated approval Thursday of a $15 billion package of fees, taxes and royalties on oil and gas companies. The money would be used to promote renewable fuels.

The bill is largely aimed at recovering an estimated $10 billion that stands to be lost to the government because of an error in deep-water drilling leases for the Gulf of Mexico issued in the late 1990s.

So what is contradicting themselves? Please email me with that answer! str8stroke@yahoo.com thanks.

2007-01-18 06:36:20 · answer #2 · answered by str8stroke 1 · 1 0

We produce 60% of our oil now. Yes I know I'm contributing to a 9 year old thread lol. I found this because when I googled "Republicans contradict themselves" and "Democrats contradict themselves" both answer sets were the same - all articles about Republicans contradicting themselves - except this one lol.

2015-06-21 11:57:49 · answer #3 · answered by Mike D 1 · 0 0

Ya mon, they are, yet do not blame them the money all and diverse is those that concept this up. As you recognize it would want to likely by no ability get replaced, yet "that is a right". Too undesirable they did not take heed to Ron Paul on the monetary gadget and conflict, Ha. same human beings pulling the strings, diverse puppets, properly the recent funds human beings did lower back the Clinton's and vegas had the democrats right out the close as a 2-a million well-liked even earlier absolutely everyone became chosen, ask your self why they did not enable Richardson to ge the nod. although many are ants, even as yo get adequate ants jointly they could bypass a mountain, although the ants are smart. Later. P>S. do not take the 'undesirable" solutions intense, they could be coming from Chavez's Centre Miranda international and the fellow might want to be operating for ayers. on your factor I continuously ask your self why a particular non secular team it truly is adverse to abortion votes for them, ironic. yet a robust regardless of the reality that upsetting question. Oh and by technique of ways for a number of the answerers, this administration has slug more effective funds adverse to the wall for courses that it can make howard dean's head spon. by technique of ways is he a healthcare professional and can want to you bypass to him, no longer me.

2016-10-15 10:06:04 · answer #4 · answered by ishman 4 · 0 0

I watched that, it was quite good. They said they were removing subsidies on an industry that pulled 20 billion in profits from our public lands with out paying a single cent in royalties. This land is our land and they should have to pay to use it. This issue is about making the industry pay its fair share of U.S. taxes. As for dependence on foreign oil, I agree about their direction towards alternative energy. We have the technology and it is now becoming viable to get us off of fossil fuels, especially concerning home energy. We still use quite a bit of heating oil for home use, replace that with clean energy and that means for fuel for our cars. Give technology and markets a chance, we will ween ourselves off of oil.

this was last night's c-span I watched, not sure about the reasoning behind today's.

2007-01-18 06:18:01 · answer #5 · answered by trigunmarksman 6 · 2 0

We elect politicians, not saints, what do you expect them to do?
Right now Dem's are looking to reduce the tax break the oil companies are getting for exploration. They make their profit from finding oil, the more oil they find, the more profit they make, why should I pay them to find what they make their profit from?
If I ran a clothing store, would the government pay me to meet with suppliers?

2007-01-18 07:49:16 · answer #6 · answered by justa 7 · 1 0

Boring. The democrats also passed a bill to lower interest rates on college loans, stem cell research, reduced medication fees for medicare people. All in which Bush said he would VETO.

2007-01-18 18:13:16 · answer #7 · answered by Gettin_by 3 · 0 0

Out/Down with representative government they suck & should NOT have the rule & control they currently posses!!! All of them are useless & need to be reduced to government employee's that can be fired at will! Right Now everyone in Washington D.C/local/State.with a government job or elected position needs to be fired!!! Some street people could do a better job in respecting their fellow legal citizen!

2007-01-18 06:16:07 · answer #8 · answered by bulabate 6 · 1 1

The right is in no position to talk about contradictions !

2007-01-18 06:31:34 · answer #9 · answered by dadacoolone 5 · 3 1

Anybody still doubting who's side the Libs are on...

2007-01-18 06:23:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers