Well I'll let you do the research and PROVE your claim.....
Show us just how much US energy comes from Alaska....???? I'll wait...
GOP fact check (not that facts are important)
- Thread starter Onceler
- Start date
Well I'll let you do the research and PROVE your claim.....
Show us just how much US energy comes from Alaska....???? I'll wait...
cawacko
Well-known member
some number was quoted last night for either energy or oil from Alaska. I've never seen a chart stating what percent of our oil or energy we get from the various states.
uscitizen
Villified User
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbbl_m.htm
You might look at this page as well. Looks like about 16% or so of domestic oil production comes from alaska. But that is not including imports of oil and other forms of energy we use. Hydro, nuke, coal, etc.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_sum_crdsnd_adc_mbbl_m.htm
I believe the wording used was energy, not just oil.
Last edited:
uscitizen
Villified User
We get natural gas from Alaska ?
cawacko
Well-known member
He's answering a question I asked.
No...that wasn't the salient point....
McCain said she's governor of a state that supplies 20% of US energy, and you disagreed with that figure....no body is claiming Palin has control of the valves in the pipeline....
and US citizen should be aware of the NEW natural gas pipline that Palin is bragging about....
Without Alaskan oil and gas, you dims would be running your PC's on liberal hot air...
uscitizen
Villified User
As you said 20% of our energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sources_of_electricity_in_the_USA_2006.png
Another one to clarify energy useage and sourses a bit.
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_use_in_the_United_States"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_use_in_the_United_States[/ame]
you can kiss my ass now or later
Last edited:
Speaking of Palin's lies:
"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.”
Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans
Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:44am EDT
By Yereth Rosen
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain's vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called "bridge to nowhere" has upset many Alaskans.
During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."
In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.
The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians' pet projects.
When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.
"People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I'm for this' ... and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting," Weinstein said.
Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.
National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.
Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.
The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.
In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.
"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.
Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin's reversal on the bridge issue.
http://www.reuters.com/article/poli...csNews&pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=10216
"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.”
Palin "bridge to nowhere" line angers many Alaskans
Mon Sep 1, 2008 10:44am EDT
By Yereth Rosen
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain's vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called "bridge to nowhere" has upset many Alaskans.
During her first speech after being named as McCain's surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress "'thanks but no thanks' on that bridge to nowhere."
In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere," political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska's Congressional delegation during her run for governor.
The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians' pet projects.
When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term "bridge to nowhere," according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin's campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.
"People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I'm for this' ... and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting," Weinstein said.
Palin's spokeswoman in Alaska was not immediately available to comment.
National fury over the bridge caused Congress to remove the earmark designation, but Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion.
Last year, Palin announced she was stopping state work on the controversial project, earning her admirers from earmark critics and budget hawks from around the nation. The move also thrust her into the spotlight as a reform-minded newcomer.
The state, however, never gave back any of the money that was originally earmarked for the Gravina Island bridge, said Weinstein and Elerding.
In fact, the Palin administration has spent "tens of millions of dollars" in federal funds to start building a road on Gravina Island that is supposed to link up to the yet-to-be-built bridge, Weinstein said.
"She said 'thanks but no thanks,' but they kept the money," said Elerding about her applause line.
Former state House Speaker Gail Phillips, a Republican who represented the Kenai Peninsula city of Homer, is also critical about Palin's reversal on the bridge issue.
http://www.reuters.com/article/poli...csNews&pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=10216
uscitizen
Villified User
Ohh you mean this pipeline which is scheduled to start supplying nat gas to the lower 48 in 2016 ?
It seems you republicans have a problem with tenses.
http://www.jobmonkey.com/oilindustry/html/alaska_highway_pipeline.html
It seems you republicans have a problem with tenses.
http://www.jobmonkey.com/oilindustry/html/alaska_highway_pipeline.html
….premature ejaculation too.
uscitizen
Villified User
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
You're right, let's just wait another couple years before starting.
uscitizen
Villified User
Ohh we should start now, but it is not currently supplying any natural gas to the lower 48.
cawacko
Well-known member
LOL... yeah, those type of projects get approved and built within a week or two. There's no actual work done before then.
Wonder why the AP just does not call themselves AP DNC
Brookings Institution
Brookings has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including the Global Governance Initiative, which aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government, based in part on economic and Third World considerations. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush’s tax cuts in 2003…
The Brookings Institution’s President since 2002 has been Strobe Talbott, who served as President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State. The Board of Trustees features Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of John Kerry; Zoe Baird, failed Clinton appointee for Attorney General…
And the Urban Institute is even more far left Democrat Party organ.
Again from Discover The Networks:
Urban Institute
In 1980, UI called for socialized health care in the United States, and in 1982 began a running critique of the Reagan Administration under its Changing Domestic Priorities Project; the critique ran to 26 volumes, with research paid for by the Ford Foundation.
In 1990, UI put together a similar critique of the administration of President George H.W. Bush. In the wake of the Los Angeles riots in 1992, UI became a leading policy-center apologist for urban black violence, focusing on societal and economic, rather than moral and criminal, factors in its analysis of the riots.
In 2001, UI and the Brookings Institution began collaboration on a Tax Policy Center (TPC) to discredit President George W. Bush’s tax cut plans, which UI claimed disproportionately and unjustly favored “the wealthy.” …
Making a case for taxpayer-funded system of socialized medicine, another May 2006 UI report concludes that “public insurance appears to offer the best financial protection from high out-of-pocket expenses and financial burden for low-income families.”
In a June 2006 report on immigration and government tax revenues, UI concludes that: “Immigrants in Washington, D.C. pay their fair share of the region’s tax bill. The most educated foreign-born earners actually pay more in taxes than natives; the lower skilled contribute too.” This report makes no distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens, the latter of whom it refers to as “unauthorized immigrants.”
But this “unbiased” study is what constituted a “fact” to the Associated Press.
And where were the AP’s “fact checkers” during the Democrat Convention? No where to be found.
No, the AP will be propagandists for their Democrat masters until the last dog dies.
Brookings Institution
Brookings has been involved with a variety of internationalist and state-sponsored programs, including the Global Governance Initiative, which aspires to facilitate the establishment of a U.N.-dominated world government, based in part on economic and Third World considerations. Brookings Fellows have also called for additional global collaboration on trade and banking; the expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and nationalized health insurance for children. Nine Brookings economists signed a petition opposing President Bush’s tax cuts in 2003…
The Brookings Institution’s President since 2002 has been Strobe Talbott, who served as President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State. The Board of Trustees features Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of John Kerry; Zoe Baird, failed Clinton appointee for Attorney General…
And the Urban Institute is even more far left Democrat Party organ.
Again from Discover The Networks:
Urban Institute
In 1980, UI called for socialized health care in the United States, and in 1982 began a running critique of the Reagan Administration under its Changing Domestic Priorities Project; the critique ran to 26 volumes, with research paid for by the Ford Foundation.
In 1990, UI put together a similar critique of the administration of President George H.W. Bush. In the wake of the Los Angeles riots in 1992, UI became a leading policy-center apologist for urban black violence, focusing on societal and economic, rather than moral and criminal, factors in its analysis of the riots.
In 2001, UI and the Brookings Institution began collaboration on a Tax Policy Center (TPC) to discredit President George W. Bush’s tax cut plans, which UI claimed disproportionately and unjustly favored “the wealthy.” …
Making a case for taxpayer-funded system of socialized medicine, another May 2006 UI report concludes that “public insurance appears to offer the best financial protection from high out-of-pocket expenses and financial burden for low-income families.”
In a June 2006 report on immigration and government tax revenues, UI concludes that: “Immigrants in Washington, D.C. pay their fair share of the region’s tax bill. The most educated foreign-born earners actually pay more in taxes than natives; the lower skilled contribute too.” This report makes no distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens, the latter of whom it refers to as “unauthorized immigrants.”
But this “unbiased” study is what constituted a “fact” to the Associated Press.
And where were the AP’s “fact checkers” during the Democrat Convention? No where to be found.
No, the AP will be propagandists for their Democrat masters until the last dog dies.