Cuba

Originally posted by Robtard
What now?

You know what your are doing, its not going to work, why try?

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You know what your are doing, its not going to work, why try?

I'm not playing at being stupid TI......

What is he doing?

-AD

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You know what your are doing, its not going to work, why try?

If you would just spell it out, we could then move forward like adults. Because I'm not exactly sure what you're on about with this.

Originally posted by Robtard
If you would just spell it out, we could then move forward like adults. Because I'm not exactly sure what you're on about with this.

Fine, Ill make a new thread about the welfare state.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Fine, Ill make a new thread about the welfare state.

Excellent, always a good idea to me a new thread about an aspect of an old thread. I have done this many times in forums myself TI. Good debating 👆

Originally posted by Robtard
If you would just spell it out, we could then move forward like adults. Because I'm not exactly sure what you're on about with this.

You are in the lot too Rob, you just blindly follow Obama, if he really cared about oppression then why does he not write and executive order like he did with immigration and cut off oil purchases from the middle east? Why now add Cuba to the mix?

So you are upset that Obama is being pragmatic?

Originally posted by Lestov16
So you are upset that Obama is being pragmatic?

He is doing everything the opposite of pragmatic in this situation.

Legalizing all illegals, and removing sanctions with a communist country? Why not send cars to North Korea too now? Ha!

Diplomacy, and the benefits of the immigration deal have already been explained to you.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
You are in the lot too Rob, you just blindly follow Obama, if he really cared about oppression then why does he not write and executive order like he did with immigration and cut off oil purchases from the middle east? Why now add Cuba to the mix?

Probably because it would cause a US oil shortage and domestic fuel prices would skyrocket, there would be massive lines at fuel stations, rationing etc similar with what happened during the 73 Oil Crisis.

Then people like you would blame Obama with trying to destroy America via anarchy.

Originally posted by Robtard
Probably because it would cause an oil shortage and domestic fuel prices would skyrocket, there would be massive lines at fuel stations, rationing etc similar with what happened during the 73 Oil Crisis.

Then people like you would blame Obama with trying to destroy America via anarchy.

Like I said earlier Rob, by loosening regulations here and ramping up domestic oil supply, there would not be that problem.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Like I said earlier Rob, by loosening regulations here and ramping up domestic oil supply, there would not be that problem.

So allow oil companies to do destroy the environment? They don't really care in the Middle East so we let them do what they do, but here, there would be massive backlash, as there already is.

Originally posted by Lestov16
So allow oil companies to do destroy the environment? They don't really care in the Middle East so we let them do what they do, but here, there would be massive backlash, as there already is.

If you knew anything other then what the government tells you and you lived in a state that has oil, like Texas, you would know it does not destroy the environment. I in fact have a friend who has mineral rights along with his whole family down in Eagle Ford, Texas. They all have pumps on there land and it has not destroyed anything on any of their land.

Your claim is debunked.

That is good for them. To increase the domestic oil supply like you want, the government and oil companies will have to take land that is environmentally fragile and belongs to those who don't want to convert their land into an oil field.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Like I said earlier Rob, by loosening regulations here and ramping up domestic oil supply, there would not be that problem.

So I did some googling and domestic oil production has steadily gone up since 2008-9.

Source: http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS1&f=M <--- there's a graph for easy viewing pleasures

Side note: If you haven't noticed, the price per gallon has been dropping. Here in the Bay Area where gas is notoriously high, it's $2.76 a gallon as of this morning at the station close to my house.

You were the one who brought up Saudi, not me.

Originally posted by Lestov16
That is good for them. To increase the domestic oil supply like you want, the government and oil companies will have to take land that is environmentally fragile and belongs to those who don't want to convert their land into an oil field.

Not true at all

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Typical strawman tactics

There was recently a segment on NPR where an environmental lawyer said the Keystone XL pipeline was "only political in Washington." That on the ground, local conservative farmers have banded together with liberal activists to try to fight the construction of the pipeline.

In that case, the fear is that there's a small (but still serious) chance that the pipeline could leak and contaminate one of the largest aquifers in North America.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Done.

Let's just move on.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
There was recently a segment on NPR where an environmental lawyer said the Keystone XL pipeline was "only political in Washington." That on the ground, local conservative farmers have banded together with liberal activists to try to fight the construction of the pipeline.

In that case, the fear is that there's a small (but still serious) chance that the pipeline could leak and contaminate one of the largest aquifers in North America.

Yeah, that isn't Lestov getting government aid. That's his mother receiving support for a medical condition.

Let's just move on.

The pipeline will go through, and Obama has lied about that one as well. Even though he says he is against it, the pipeline is actually still being built.