What Are the Consequences of Obama Failing?

[SirJosephPorter]

Oil we got, and as to fresh water, well we will just have to see.

What do you mean, ‘oil we got’, ironsides? You don’t have oil; you have to import oils from Middle East, Canada etc. As to water, many of the western states are short of fresh water.

 

[ironsides]

Oil we got, and as to fresh water, well we will just have to see.

What do you mean, ‘oil we got’, ironsides? You don’t have oil; you have to import oils from Middle East, Canada etc. As to water, many of the western states are short of fresh water.

You do not read the news that well (only kidding), we import oil so we do not have to use ours at the moment.

The U.S.' Untapped Oil Bounty - Kiplinger.com

When the time is right, we will use it.

 

[ironsides]

You do not read the news that well (only kidding), we import oil so we do not have to use ours at the moment.

The U.S.' Untapped Oil Bounty - Kiplinger.com

When the time is right, we will use it.

We do need more refineries though, been a few years since we built one.

 

[ironsides]

We do need more refineries though, been a few years since we built one.

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate—

USGS Release: 3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate— (4/10/2008 2:25:36 PM)

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You do not read the news that well (only kidding), we import oil so we do not have to use ours at the moment.

The U.S.' Untapped Oil Bounty - Kiplinger.com

When the time is right, we will use it.

According to the article, it will cost too much to get the oil from the reserves mentioned. So at current price it is not economical. However when oil prices go up, at some point it will become economical to tap the untouched sources.

 

[YukonJack]

Back to the original topic of this thread:

Better question would have been: What are the consequences of Obama succeeding?

So far he seems to be out of focus. His proposed solutions to everything are nothing but hocus pocus.

In short he is a bogus POTUS.

 

[FiveParadox]

Back to the original topic of this thread:

Better question would have been: What are the consequences of Obama succeeding?

So far he seems to be out of focus. His proposed solutions to everything are nothing but hocus pocus.

In short he is a bogus POTUS.

Cute soundbite, YukonJack.

Here are some “consequences” of success:

• Accessible health care for people throughout the United States of America notwithstanding social status;
• Restored principles of justice through the closure of unconstitutional institutions such as Guantanamo Bay;
• Furthered research and development using embryonic stem cells;
• Mitigation of the economic downturn through stimulus;
• Renewed and more positive relationships with Arabic and European countries; and
• Discontinuation of the armed intervention in the Republic of Iraq.

Sounds good to me.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Where have you been all this time, Yukon Jack? Welcome back. As to Obama being out of focus, I don’t think your far right friends agree with you there. According to the Republican base, Obama is as focused as a laser beam, with one purpose of turning USA into a Socialist, Communist country. Again, according to far right, he has been remarkably successful in doing that. He has confirmed far right’s worst fear, worst suspicions and more.

So I don’t think far right would agree with you there.

 

[ironsides]

According to the article, it will cost too much to get the oil from the reserves mentioned. So at current price it is not economical. However when oil prices go up, at some point it will become economical to tap the untouched sources.

Looks like that is the plan.

 

[ironsides]

Obama succeeds and the world economy will collapse, as will democracy as we now know it. Mr. empty suit is like Howdy Doody. (puppet

 

[YukonJack]

SirJosephPorter said:

"We don’t get FOX here in Canada, ironsides (maybe if you specially pay for it we do, I don’t know). So I don’t watch FOX. We do have a channel which put son the 10.00 a.m. show on Sunday mornings. Sometimes I watch that."

FOXNews is widely available in Canada for those who are not CHEAP and want impartial and fair news coverage.

 

[YukonJack]

Obama not out of focus?

Totally out of focus as far as the deficit and debt are concerned.
Totally out of focus as far as his his attack dogs are concerned calling real Americans "rent-a-mob".

He has tried to turn America into another Cuba, but so far he has not succeeded and based on his rapidly sinking polls he never will.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

FOXNews is widely available in Canada for those who are not CHEAP and want impartial and fair news coverage.

YJ, FOX coverage is about as impartial and as fair as that by National Enquirer.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

He has tried to turn America into another Cuba, but so far he has not succeeded and based on his rapidly sinking polls he never will.

YJ, that is not what your extreme right friends at Town Hall etc. think. According to them Obama has already converted USA into a Socialist state, he has already done irreparable damage.

Indeed, some of them are so scared of Obama, that they think that Hillary would have been preferable as a president than Obama. I didn’t think the far right would hate anybody with more passion, more venom than Clintons, but Obama has managed to achieve that honour.

 

[YukonJack]

The following comes to you as the courtesy of one who by his own admission, never watched FOXNews and proud being of his ignorance:

"YJ, FOX coverage is about as impartial and as fair as that by National Enquirer. ealistic chance of getting elected, anything is possible."

See for yourselves!

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The following comes to you as the courtesy of one who by his own admission, never watched FOXNews and proud being of his ignorance:

"YJ, FOX coverage is about as impartial and as fair as that by National Enquirer. ealistic chance of getting elected, anything is possible."

See for yourselves!

FOX news has a reputation for being the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, YJ. Tell me, when was the last time it said anything negative about the Republican Party? When was the last time it said anything positive about the Democratic Party? Probably never (or hardly ever).

I don’t have to read the Enquirer to know that it is trash, it has got a reputation for it. Same way, I don’t have to watch FOX to know that it is a mouthpiece of the Republican Party, it has the reputation for it.

 

[ironsides]

SirJosephPorter said:

"We don’t get FOX here in Canada, ironsides (maybe if you specially pay for it we do, I don’t know). So I don’t watch FOX. We do have a channel which put son the 10.00 a.m. show on Sunday mornings. Sometimes I watch that."

FOXNews is widely available in Canada for those who are not CHEAP and want impartial and fair news coverage.

So I watched 3 episodes of Glenn Beck. Shoot me.

 

[YukonJack]

"Where have you been all this time, Yukon Jack? "

Seeing the totally mindless back-and-forth between you and some nornal people, I had half a mind never to appear again on these threads of insanity, but you have the knack of bringing out the worst in everyone. So, I am back.

Then you went ahead and and in your infinite wisdom you said:

"FOX news has a reputation for being the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, YJ. Tell me, when was the last time it said anything negative about the Republican Party? When was the last time it said anything positive about the Democratic Party? Probably never (or hardly ever).

I don’t have to read the Enquirer to know that it is trash, it has got a reputation for it. Same way, I don’t have to watch FOX to know that it is a mouthpiece of the Republican Party, it has the reputation for it."

Here I gave you far more latituede than you deserve. For someone who is proud of being ignorant about FOXNews, you seem to be quite knowledgable about it. Typical liberal ignorance.

So, tell me, when was the last time your oracles of truth, namely CNN or New York Times or gave credit to anything on the right of you hero, Yossif Vissarionovitch Stalin?

 

[YukonJack]

"YJ, FOX coverage is about as impartial and as fair as that by National Enquirer."

May be so, SirJosephPorter, but at least I am not too cheap to open the family purse, (which , in my case is not loaded by a family doctor) to a diverse opinion.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So, tell me, when was the last time your oracles of truth, namely CNN or New York Times or gave credit to anything on the right of you hero, Yossif Vissarionovitch Stalin?

Don’t change the subject, YJ, we are talking here of FOX news and your claim that it is an impartial, independent news source. Introducing the red herring of CNN simply shows that you are out of arguments.

It was your claim that FOX is unbiased, so I asked the logical, reasonable question, when was the last time it said anything negative about Republicans and anything positive about Democrats. You perfectly well know the answer to that (never, or hardly ever) so you tried to change the subject by intruding CNN into the discussion.

Well, it won’t work. Let us settle the issue of FOX first, then we will discuss CNN.