home

Commie Gas from Chavez

By Jeralyn, Section Foreign Affairs
Posted on Thu Aug 25, 2005 at 07:17:14 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Giblets at the inimitable Fafblog today:

Oh sure, so Chavez wants to sell you gas now. But what he won't tell you is that it's commie gas. Infiltrating your engine, redistributing wealth in your carburetor, nationalizing your internal combustion engine, assasinating czars in your windshield wiper fluid! Oh, he has plans. Dark red Marxist plans - and they're headed right for your gas tank! You were warned, America - you were warned!

Also highly recommended, Medium Lobster at Fafblog on the birth of Iraq.

< John Bolton's Private Reception | Learning From Poker Boot Camp >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Commie Gas from Chavez | 24 comments (24 topical)
    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    Buy a bigger car, a bigger truck, a bigger Nazi staff car. Burn as many soldiers as you can. Time for Bush to put more oil into the ground in Texas. And shrug his buttocks some more.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    My buddy mentioned this yesterday, I thought it was a joke. I just paid $2.79 a gallon this morning, and that was at one of those no-name generic stations, so I am all ears. The oil lobby would never let it happen, they don't share the same respect for working people as Chavez. And Bush would never want to upset the oil lobby. Another option for Bush/Congress would be to pass an emergency reduction of gasoline taxes, or to at least stop buying gas for the US reserve and bring it to the market as some Dems have suggested. One of these options would help with prices and save face with Chavez. I mean it looks bad for the US govt. when the most concern for American working people and gas prices is being shown by a foreign leader of an oil producing nation. Looks real bad.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#3)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    Kdog, Average $2.83 regular in San Diego county. Commie gas. I love it!

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    You guys got it the worst Che, isn't it up to $3 in some parts of southern CA? Repeal or reduce gasoline taxes, working people are hurting!!!

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#6)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    Kdog, It's worse in Hawaii. They are considering a cap on prices charged by LOCAL distributors, which could lead to shortages (aka punishment). Chavez's offer may seem quite attractive to them. We can easily pay >$3/gal for premium in SD. Yet there's a refinery 80 miles away. Q. What was the per barrel price of oil in 2000?

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    Oh well. Probably the worst thing that could happen for democrats right now is if BushCo somehow managed to lower oil prices. People are going to freeze to death this winter. People are going to cook to death next summer. People will get fired constantly because they simply cannot afford to go to work. Midterms coming up guys.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    Montana Gov. Schweitzer is floating a plan that will free us from foreign oil dependency. It was invented by Germans and used by Nazi's during WWII and SA during apartheid sanction. It only becomes cost effective when oil is over $35./barrel. The only people that would argue against it are those who love the idea of $150/ barrel oil prices. Could they be the same ones that allow SUV's (trucks) to be classified as cars, while ignoring fuel efficiency standards? Evidently there are people (leaders?) in this country who seem to want high oil prices and increased comsumption. Who could they be?

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#9)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    Here are the prices at the pump around the linked text world, in case the kitchen gets too hot. And , here are stats on international production and consumption.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    "a plan that will free us from foreign oil dependency." If it were only so simple...

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#11)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    sarc-Really, Montana, alone has enough coal to meet the energy needs of America for the next 40 years. And the process, pollution free, produces electricity while making petro chemicals. Ywo years to set up and it is a go. Sounds too good to be true? Only if the competition has enough muscle to squash it. In a world where market forces ruled, the gasoline produced from that process woud be $1./gal. We probably will not see that. Gov. Schweitzer seems to be one of the few republican govenors not involved in a massive corruption scandal, maybe that is why you say
    If it were only so simple...
    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    squeaky - I admit I haven't really studied the coal to gas process, and it does sound promising, but unless I read it wrong, your link says Montana has about 2.5 billion tons. The US imports over 4 billion barrels/year. At 3 barrels/ton, Montana can do 7.5 billion barrels total - less than two years of imported oil. Did I miss something?

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    Sarc- "Montana has 120 billion tons of state and federal coal reserves under its surface, mostly in Eastern Montana. Schweitzer said 115 billion tons of that coal is recoverable. He said using the Fischer-Tropsch method, one ton of coal would produce 1.5 barrels of diesel fuel. A barrel is 42 gallons." from: link China and India are jumping on it too.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    unless I read it wrong, your link says Montana has about 2.5 billion tons.
    Montana owns that amount in a single deposit. That's a fraction of the total coal available in the state.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#15)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    A. About $25.00/barrel.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:47 PM EST
    Squeaky - A barrel does not equal 42 gallons of gasoline. And as much as I like the idea, this is just a replay of the old "oil from shale" game that was played out in the 70's and early 80's in the Rocky Mountain Region. Some of the things not mentioned is how much water is required, and the damage to the environment. It requires massive strip mining, and that is ugly. Take I40W to I17N and get off in Butte to see what I mean. But I am glad to see you start to think. Tell us. Are you also for drilling in ANWAR and nuclear power? et al - First, I would guess Bush is jawboning SA. Secondly, a big part of the problem is the environmental requirements, especially in CA, for various blends based on climate/time of year. Thirdly, there is no shortage of crude; there is a shortage of refinery capacity. And we haven't built a new refinery in 30 years. Can you spell, Not In My Back Yard, boys and girls? We also use oil, and natural gas, for electricity generation. That's silly. We should be using nuclear for electric power, and as much water power as possible and that coal the Gov and Squeak talks about. So shall ye reap applies. The environmental wackos have backed us into a tough situation. They are a child of the Left. Enjoy your family relationship.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:48 PM EST
    PPJ-too busy trolling to check your facts. Barrel=42 Gallons Not like "That old oil from shale idea" oil was $2/ barrel back then. From link above:
    the break even point comes when crude oil is more than $35 a barrel. Friday crude oil futures settled at $60.57 a barrel.
    And from link above: No Water needed
    The coal-conversion process produces no air pollution, uses no water and creates electricity as a byproduct. The petroleum fuels produced could be shipped out of state by pipeline.
    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#18)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:48 PM EST
    too busy trolling to check your facts.
    PPJ doesn't need no stinkin' facts never has never will, Just spews BS and pronounces it gospel, aint that good enough for you?

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    The environmental wackos have backed us into a tough situation.
    Yeah, by the looks of our fuel efficiency standards you really have to conclude that the enviro-wackos have run amok. (rolleyes)

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    Squeaky – My point, which was not well made, was that the 42 gallons aren’t gasoline. Depending on the type of crude (low sulfur, high sulfur, etc.), refining process, and the type of gasoline, etc., desired, you will get “x” amount of gasoline, diesel fuel, petrochemicals, etc. As for the articles comment about no arsenic, etc., that is also true for regular crude refining. These are byproducts that are sold. I guess the writer threw that in just as a “yahoo I’m a booster of Montana coal” comment. What I find interesting is the “no water required” claim. I couldn’t find that any in any link. Can you provide it? It is a very startling statement, and if true, removes a big obstacle to converting the coal on site, by providing a huge reduction in transportation costs. It will be interesting to see what the environmentalist wackos have to say about this. Strip mining makes one gosh awful mess, even if backfilled/covered, especially in the high desert areas where the coal is located. I am a “techie” at heart, and love the thought of this. But I would sure like to see what the numbers are. Spending tax payer dollars for $4.00 gasoline doesn’t flip my Bic. And make no mistake. We’re talking big tax payer dollars here. Very big. Ernie – Were you off fighting in foreign lands when all the protests against nuclear power were going on? But wait… you won’t fight. Guess you were too busy demonstrating to notice what the real long term effect would be…..$3.00 gasoline. SD – Glad to see you are as sweet as ever. Do you a comment on the subject, or just an attack?

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#21)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    Fair enough guys, Montana has an unbelievable amount of coal. This does seem to be promising.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    PPP...gas would be 3.00 bucks a gallon even if you donned a Rambo muscle suit and went and whupped every last raghead living on top of your oil fields all over the world. It's a supply/demand issue and the demand is way up. Not only are we burning it like crazy, the infusion of our money into the Chinese economy is helping them start burning more and more. As for nookular, the bad thing is no one wants to live near the plants (property values and TMI syndrome and all that) and it creates waste that stays deadly for millions of years. We will be forced to develop renewable energy at some point. Oil will run out. Instead of throwing away trillions fighting the people whose oil we need, why not put that money into developing renewable energy? Oh, I forgot one big reason why, Cheney and Bush are oil company fronts.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#23)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:49 PM EST
    PPJ-Do you read at all or do you read with little comprehension or retention? I realize that this may be a wasted effort but what the heck: from above link:
    The coal-conversion process produces no air pollution, uses no water and creates electricity as a byproduct. The petroleum fuels produced could be shipped out of state by pipeline.
    Emphasis added is mine

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Squeak, you and Jim are arguing about different things. You're pointing out that no water is used in the conversion process, and he's pointing out the massive water needs of strip mining to GET the coal. And while we're having a Blue Moon, he's right -- the sticking point is the mining of the coal. The HILARITY is that Jim thinks Bush is trying to reduce oil prices, or gasoline prices! That's really rich. Bush has poured more highest-price-in-history oil into that sumphole in Texas than any other profit-making President in US history. The oil companies and the military companies are planning on BURNING A BILLION at the Superdome in September. Just because they have so much, just because they can. To hell with the military orphans, and to hell with the people who drive for work instead of leisure.

    Re: Commie Gas from Chavez (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:02:50 PM EST
    Im not talking about Coal Bed Methane Extraction which may be what PPJ is referring to as it uses lots of water. The depth of coal mines are often below the water table and has to be pumped out to prevent contaminaton.

    Commie Gas from Chavez | 24 comments (24 topical)