[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Radio Paradise Comments - Beez - May 30, 2023 - 7:22am
 
Wordle - daily game - ptooey - May 30, 2023 - 7:17am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Beez - May 30, 2023 - 7:04am
 
Fascism In America - Red_Dragon - May 30, 2023 - 7:00am
 
Come join us in Eureka! - William - May 30, 2023 - 6:01am
 
Ukraine - kurtster - May 30, 2023 - 12:53am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - renaultr17 - May 29, 2023 - 9:50pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - westslope - May 29, 2023 - 7:49pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 29, 2023 - 4:57pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 29, 2023 - 4:52pm
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - May 29, 2023 - 1:32pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - May 29, 2023 - 11:18am
 
Helpful emergency signs - Proclivities - May 29, 2023 - 7:14am
 
Eversolo DMP-A6 streamer and RP? - William - May 28, 2023 - 8:36pm
 
MQA in administration - William - May 28, 2023 - 8:27pm
 
Stream stopping at promo - William - May 28, 2023 - 8:18pm
 
What's your favorite quote? - maryte - May 28, 2023 - 9:12am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - May 28, 2023 - 4:59am
 
Ask for a tea - DaveInSaoMiguel - May 28, 2023 - 3:29am
 
Graphic designers, ho's! - Manbird - May 27, 2023 - 5:43pm
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - ScottN - May 27, 2023 - 5:28pm
 
THREE WORDS - oldviolin - May 27, 2023 - 12:52pm
 
FOUR WORDS - oldviolin - May 27, 2023 - 11:42am
 
ONE WORD - oldviolin - May 27, 2023 - 11:30am
 
TWO WORDS - oldviolin - May 27, 2023 - 11:28am
 
Things You Thought Today - Steely_D - May 27, 2023 - 8:34am
 
China - miamizsun - May 27, 2023 - 8:04am
 
Animal Resistance - Red_Dragon - May 27, 2023 - 7:46am
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - miamizsun - May 27, 2023 - 7:24am
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - May 27, 2023 - 6:57am
 
RightWingNutZ - kcar - May 26, 2023 - 8:09pm
 
You're welcome, manbird. - Bill_J - May 26, 2023 - 6:00pm
 
In My Room - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 26, 2023 - 4:17pm
 
The Lincoln quote ... wasn't from Lincoln - Proclivities - May 26, 2023 - 1:19pm
 
Live Music - Steely_D - May 26, 2023 - 10:51am
 
It seemed like a good idea at the time - Red_Dragon - May 26, 2023 - 10:35am
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - May 26, 2023 - 8:31am
 
A Picture paints a thousand words - Proclivities - May 26, 2023 - 8:00am
 
The Daily complaint forum, Please complain or be Happy - sunybuny - May 26, 2023 - 7:08am
 
Gas or Electric? - ColdMiser - May 26, 2023 - 6:19am
 
Need help - anyone got a copy of Aristotle's Politics? - lily34 - May 26, 2023 - 5:48am
 
Republican Party - westslope - May 26, 2023 - 2:30am
 
Word Association - temporary - oldviolin - May 25, 2023 - 1:34pm
 
Florida - R_P - May 25, 2023 - 11:22am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - May 25, 2023 - 10:27am
 
What's playing - lily34 - May 25, 2023 - 9:17am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - May 25, 2023 - 9:15am
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - May 25, 2023 - 9:03am
 
Happy Birthday! - lily34 - May 25, 2023 - 8:40am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - May 25, 2023 - 7:51am
 
The Obituary Page - lily34 - May 25, 2023 - 5:17am
 
Musky Mythology - rgio - May 25, 2023 - 4:49am
 
Canada - Red_Dragon - May 24, 2023 - 6:38pm
 
What Are You Grateful For? - Antigone - May 24, 2023 - 4:06pm
 
Graphic designers, ho! - RedTopFireBelow - May 24, 2023 - 12:43pm
 
LeftWingNutZ - Proclivities - May 24, 2023 - 10:29am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - May 24, 2023 - 10:19am
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - GeneP59 - May 24, 2023 - 8:16am
 
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT - miamizsun - May 24, 2023 - 5:22am
 
Questions. - oldviolin - May 23, 2023 - 7:59pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - May 23, 2023 - 7:58pm
 
mood - oldviolin - May 23, 2023 - 7:57pm
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - oldviolin - May 23, 2023 - 2:55pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - Proclivities - May 23, 2023 - 12:19pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 23, 2023 - 11:40am
 
What The Hell Buddy? - oldviolin - May 23, 2023 - 10:53am
 
Floyd forum - kurtster - May 22, 2023 - 7:26pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 22, 2023 - 4:31pm
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - oldviolin - May 22, 2023 - 1:58pm
 
Quick! I need a chicken... - oldviolin - May 22, 2023 - 1:24pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - Beez - May 22, 2023 - 10:29am
 
Play the Blues - thisbody - May 22, 2023 - 9:30am
 
Classical Music - thisbody - May 22, 2023 - 9:16am
 
Jazz - thisbody - May 22, 2023 - 9:06am
 
Climate Change - westslope - May 22, 2023 - 12:52am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Oil, Gas Prices & Other Crapola Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Post to this Topic
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 28, 2012 - 6:11am

 Romulus wrote:

In Europe, Ford is selling the 70mpg Focus. Why isn't it here? I have an idea.
 
There are probably several reasons; one is that Ford doesn't believe there is much of a market for diesel cars in the US.  Diesel engines are apparently more common and popular in Europe, and most European nations have lower emission restrictions for diesel vehicles than the US does.  There are, I imagine, other reasons and motives.


Romulus

Romulus Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 28, 2012 - 6:01am

 lrobert wrote:
It really is hard to keep up with the ever rising gas prices and sadly, it is looking to extend to even longer times and dates.  It really is even harder now that the dependency on fuel is on its all time high, and there is just much alternative solutions can do, and most of the time, they are not even able to provide a viable solution that can be benefited by all. Just ironic, isn't it?
 
In Europe, Ford is selling the 70mpg Focus. Why isn't it here? I have an idea.

Romulus

Romulus Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 27, 2012 - 12:45pm

 romeotuma wrote:


Stop Keystone pipeline before it's too late

by Ted Turner
CNN
February 24, 2012


I own a property in Fort Pierre, South Dakota, called the Bad River Ranch. It is a beautiful place, where we have worked very hard to restore the landscape, reintroduce native wildlife species and raise bison sustainably. But it sits about 15 miles downstream of the point where TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL pipeline would cross the Bad River, and being that close has led me to examine more closely the potential risks and benefits of a project about which I have been highly skeptical from the beginning. After careful scrutiny, I believe it is not in our national interest to pursue it.

The purpose of Keystone XL is to bring tar sands crude oil through the United States to Gulf Coast refineries. The route through the United States is actually the oil industry's second choice: Transporting the oil west from Alberta to the Pacific Coast would be shorter and much cheaper, but Canadians concerned about environmental impacts and threats to native people's lands are challenging that route, and with good reason. The existing and potential environmental impacts along the 2,000-mile pipeline route are profound...



 



 
Hello, I'm Ted Turner and I urge you to STOP the Keystone Pipeline! Why? Because I can afford expensive fuel! And two, it will run though my back yard! All 3,490 acres!! Stop the madness tree killers!!!!

Romulus

Romulus Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 27, 2012 - 12:43pm

 Manbird wrote:
Why doesn't that stupid obama make my gas cheaper??? Why does he hate america so much???

 
Bush's fault.

Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Owl Creek Bridge
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 27, 2012 - 12:37pm

Why doesn't that stupid obama make my gas cheaper??? Why does he hate america so much???
Romulus

Romulus Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 27, 2012 - 12:34pm

Gas isn't going up.. the dollar is going down.
(former member)

(former member) Avatar

Location: hotel in Las Vegas
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 26, 2012 - 8:00pm



Stop Keystone pipeline before it's too late

by Ted Turner
CNN
February 24, 2012


I own a property in Fort Pierre, South Dakota, called the Bad River Ranch. It is a beautiful place, where we have worked very hard to restore the landscape, reintroduce native wildlife species and raise bison sustainably. But it sits about 15 miles downstream of the point where TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL pipeline would cross the Bad River, and being that close has led me to examine more closely the potential risks and benefits of a project about which I have been highly skeptical from the beginning. After careful scrutiny, I believe it is not in our national interest to pursue it.

The purpose of Keystone XL is to bring tar sands crude oil through the United States to Gulf Coast refineries. The route through the United States is actually the oil industry's second choice: Transporting the oil west from Alberta to the Pacific Coast would be shorter and much cheaper, but Canadians concerned about environmental impacts and threats to native people's lands are challenging that route, and with good reason. The existing and potential environmental impacts along the 2,000-mile pipeline route are profound...



 


Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:43am

 cc_rider wrote:
Today, everybody has a camera. His camera was bigger, sure, but is that the new criteria? If the meeting is 'public', the committee cannot impose rules arbitrarily, which is what they did....It was an arbitrary and capricious infringement upon civil liberties. Once again, perpetrated by Republicans. What do they have to hide? Why are they so afraid of public scrutiny?

 
The camera rules have been in place for some time - they were not made up that day; though they likely have only been enforced then with such extreme prejudice.  His "attendance" was not the issue, and there are a whole lot of "public" places where the unapproved use of cameras is prohibited.  It wouldn't surprise me to find that Josh Fox's goal was to engage in this "civil disobedience" to point out that some of those committee members are trying to "hide things" or cloak fracking details from any further scrutiny.  He can obtain the footage of that hearing elsewhere since others were apparently filming it (with appropriate credentials), so I don't think the footage was his only goal.  Good for him - he's brought more attention and scrutiny to this.

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:38am

 Proclivities wrote:
There are committee rules for the use of cameras during the hearings and credentials are required for their use. Whether or not those rules are legal is another thing.  I'm not saying it was right what the committee decided; some of them, apparently, wanted to let him stay and film.  I agree that it's a stretch to charge him with trespassing; at most, they may have been able to confiscate his camera (under their rules) if he refused to stop filming.
  Today, everybody has a camera. His camera was bigger, sure, but is that the new criteria? If the meeting is 'public', the committee cannot impose rules arbitrarily, which is what they did. Either the meeting is public or it is not: if you have a public meeting, you're not allowed to pick and choose who is allowed to attend. That is how freedom of speech and freedom of the press work.

If they were having a closed hearing, we would not be having this discussion.

More importantly, why did only Republican committee members object to his presence? Democrats did not object. What were the GOP members planning to do, that they did not want on the record? What's to prevent an audience member from using a smaller camera to record the same information? Obviously someone was filming the arrest, so cameras in general were not forbidden.

It was an arbitrary and capricious infringement upon civil liberties. Once again, perpetrated by Republicans. What do they have to hide? Why are they so afraid of public scrutiny?


Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:29am

 cc_rider wrote:

It was a public meeting. There were no credentials required for ANYONE to be in the meeting. There is no legal basis for a charge of trespassing.
 

There are committee rules for the use of cameras during the hearings and credentials are required for their use. Whether or not those rules are legal is another thing.  I'm not saying it was right what the committee decided; some of them, apparently, wanted to let him stay and film.  I agree that it's a stretch to charge him with trespassing; at most, they may have been able to confiscate his camera (under their rules) if he refused to stop filming.  In some ways, his being arrested there could do more for the cause (and his film) than being able to film the hearing would have - perhaps that's what he wanted.  I don't know - he never returns my texts.


cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:06am

 Proclivities wrote:
He did not have appropriate press credentials and was thereby "trespassing" - according to the committee.  Newsgathering is not protected if obtained through illegal activities - such as trespassing.  The Supreme Court hasn't really defined how the First Amendment protects methods used before publication or broadcast.
 
It was a public meeting. There were no credentials required for ANYONE to be in the meeting. There is no legal basis for a charge of trespassing.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:03am

 cc_rider wrote:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The press, practically by definition, is not supposed to 'make' the news, only to report upon what is happening. Which is LESS intrusive than, say, protesting. As a journalist he was not participating in the proceedings, merely reporting upon them.

The actions of the committee are a clear, unambiguous violation of the First Amendment.

 

He did not have appropriate press credentials and was thereby "trespassing" - according to the committee.  Newsgathering is not protected if obtained through illegal activities - such as trespassing.  The Supreme Court hasn't really defined how the First Amendment protects methods used before publication or broadcast.


(former member)

(former member) Avatar

Location: hotel in Las Vegas
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 11:00am

 cc_rider wrote:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The press, practically by definition, is not supposed to 'make' the news, only to report upon what is happening. Which is LESS intrusive than, say, protesting. As a journalist he was not participating in the proceedings, merely reporting upon them.

The actions of the committee are a clear, unambiguous violation of the First Amendment.

 


Well said...  you are absolutely correct...

 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:52am

 Manbird wrote:

Destroy all monsters. 

 
"The battle-cry that could save the world!
dam

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:51am

 Proclivities wrote:

Interesting, but I'm not sure that he was "within" his "First Amendment rights".  Newsgathering is not the same as "free speech"; it is largely a matter of conduct and not expressly protected by the First Amendment - yet.

  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The press, practically by definition, is not supposed to 'make' the news, only to report upon what is happening. Which is LESS intrusive than, say, protesting. As a journalist he was not participating in the proceedings, merely reporting upon them.

The actions of the committee are a clear, unambiguous violation of the First Amendment.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:50am

 Manbird wrote:

Destroy all monsters. 

 

no
Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Owl Creek Bridge
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:49am

 Proclivities wrote:

I would imagine he'd want to use that footage.  If he can help stop fracking it wouldn't be a bad thing.
 
Destroy all monsters. 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:47am

 romeotuma wrote:

I hope his arrest got well-filmed and it is in the sequel...

 

 
I would imagine he'd want to use that footage.  If he can help stop fracking it wouldn't be a bad thing.

(former member)

(former member) Avatar

Location: hotel in Las Vegas
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:46am

 Proclivities wrote:

Interesting, but I'm not sure that he was "within" his "First Amendment rights".  Newsgathering is not the same as "free speech"; it is largely a matter of conduct and not expressly protected by the First Amendment - yet.
 


I hope his arrest got well-filmed and it is in the sequel...

 
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 2, 2012 - 10:43am

 romeotuma wrote:


Josh Fox arrested at hearing

by Talia Buford
Politico
February 1, 2012


Oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker Josh Fox was arrested Wednesday morning after attempting to film a House Science Committee hearing on hydraulic fracturing....
"I'm within my First Amendment rights, and I'm being taken out," Fox shouted as he was led away.Fox has been charged with unlawful entry, according to Capitol police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider.

 
Interesting, but I'm not sure that he was "within" his "First Amendment rights".  Newsgathering is not the same as "free speech"; it is largely a matter of conduct and not expressly protected by the First Amendment - yet.


Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next