big oil

Koch Brothers take to the editorial pages

Trying to defend the indefensible:

In January 2009, just days after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, Charles and David Koch met in their company headquarters in Wichita with their longtime political strategist, Rich Fink. The country was headed toward bankruptcy, they agreed.

Any critical reader would already be shaking his/her head, even with no previous knowledge about the Koch Brothers. Too early for any evidence for such fears, the agreement had to be based on political ideology or thinly-veiled racism. Or both. But don't expect any musings about that in this (Wichita) article. It might be a McClatchy paper, but it's also ground zero in the Koch empire.

Out-of-state Blue Dog comes sniffing around

Confused Raleigh Dems hold fundraiser for Mary Landrieu:

The lunch event will be held April 2nd in the law offices of Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein in the Well Fargo Capital Center. The cost of the event ranges from $1,000 to $2,500 per person. Landrieu, who does not face re-election until 2014, chairs the Senate Small Business Committee.

Apparently I just don't understand politics as much as I thought. I thought we were having a pretty important election here in North Carolina this year, you know, trying to keep the Governor's office and take back some of our General Assembly seats, not to mention boodles of important local races. But apparently keeping an oil-dripping Blue Dog flush with cash is more important:

On comparing recent drops in the price of oil to expected drops in gas prices

So the most recent peak price of oil was $110 a barrel with a peak national average price for gasoline at the pump right at $4.00 per gallon. The price of oil recently dropped below $80/barrel and has been trading this past week in the mid 80's. 110 to 85 is a 23% drop. Oil is bought a month or two ahead of time so that means that gas should eventually drop about 23% as well, right? That would mean that the price of gas at the pump should be about $3.15 a gallon just in time for all those Labor Day vacations.
Who thinks that will really happen? Place your bets and take your chances, but remember you are playing against the House .... of Big Oil. Somebody care to remind me just why the oil industry still needs those billions in federal subsidies every year?

A cunning, unscrupulous political stunt...or the real thing?

I'm pretty sure it doesn't matter...but here's what happened:
Yesterday House Democrats proposed an amendment/motion to/in the Republican sponsored short term spending bill to keep the government running. The motion was to end the $Billions in annual taxpayer subsidies to "Big Oil." The motion was defeated 249 t0 176 with EVERY REPUBLICAN in the House voting against the repeal of oil subsidies.

Although every thinking citizen should be angry at the Republicans over this, I believe this entire exercise was a Democratic political stunt. Follow me below:

Another (big) reason to defeat Burr in November

He could be about to inherit a very important position:

The energy committee has jurisdiction over domestic oil and gas development, nuclear power, renewables, the electric grid, national parks, forests and wilderness areas and the Energy and Interior departments. It annually takes up the most bills in the Senate — those public lands and water measures add up.

The next Republican on the seniority list behind Murkowski is Richard Burr, who is in a tough general election fight in North Carolina. Should the Republicans take the Senate and Burr assume the top spot, he would be the first Southerner to lead the panel since Sen. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) in the 1990s.

Our Senators, the Climate Bill, and Tying Your Shoes with One Hand

Last Thursday, the Senate voted 53 to 47 to defeat the Murkowski resolution that would have undermined the EPA's ability to reduce global warming pollution. The vote provides a useful guide to how senators might act on a climate vote.

Of course, it is not a clear-cut comparison because some people voted against the flawed resolution to make a point about process or simply to support the science. It is significant to note that we have 10 more votes in favor of reducing carbon emissions than we did the last time climate change was discussed on the Senate floor two years ago.

Sign NCDP's Petition Against Big Oil Burr

Please take a moment to watch our new web ad and sign NCDP's petition against Big Oil Burr.

The Anatomy Of Corporate Propaganda

Before I begin, I must admit to being a little frustrated with our lack of critical thinking and our readiness to accept information and analysis if it's packaged in a way that pleases us. This character flaw is not limited to one political party or the other, and I believe it's partially an artifact of decades of consumerism and self-indulgence. There are simply not enough people asking the hard questions these days, and that is one of the heralds of a civilization in decline.

Rep. Price sure owns a lot of Oil Stock

The Sunlight Foundation has a blog post today called Oil Industry Influence: Personal Finances. It contains a chart of public information about how much stock in Oil companies members of the US House of Representatives own.

Robin Hayes Profits from Record Gas Prices

With up to $23 Million in Big Oil Stock, Robin Hayes Profits from North Carolinians Paying Record Prices at the Pump

Hardworking North Carolinians may question why Congressman Robin Hayes sides with Big Oil and against them as they struggling to pay record-high gas prices.

Financial reports released this week could explain why -- Robin Hayes owns up to $23 million in Big Oil stock, meaning that Hayes actually profits off of North Carolinians struggling with record prices at the pump.

While Hayes makes money on his millions in investments when Big Oil makes record profits, he also voted to give Big Oil $85 billion in taxpayer-funded subsidies. Big Oil has thanked him with nearly $175,000 in campaign contributions.

Syndicate content