Time to Boycott Exxon???

[Marthatex]

If environmentalists are "idiots", then I guess that's me.

Come on folks, name calling is OK in our arguments? People who complain about the gasoline prices are the "liberals", evironmentalists are "idiots". The "liberal" senators don't want to drill in ANWAR (it happens to be quite a few Republicans also).

It's one thing to state your point of view, it's another thing to label, group people in a lump, and name-call.

 

[calus_3]

Cal if we weren't in a war that a big part of the world accuses us of being in simply for "oil," I wouldn't even think twice about Exxon's profits, I'd just be buying stock. And, I guess to tell you the truth, normally I don't even give a rat's a$$ what the rest of the world thinks of us, they can go to hell. However, I know at least a dozen mothers whose sons are over there doing their jobs for this country and it just isn't right that this oil company made $10 BILLION in profits in THREE MONTHS time. They KNOW it too or they wouldn't have taken out full page ads basically apologzing for how this looks.

Yeah, the rest of the world CAN pretty much go to hell as far as I am concerned. They didn't like us when we were liberating France and saving the world from the Germans and they don't like us now that we liberated Iraq and Afganistan. It is funny that if a Democrat was in office right now all we would be hearing about is the liberation of these people and the fact that women can now vote and hold office in these two countries and how they aren't systematically raped any longer. Since it is Bush....CHIRP CHIRP CHIRP go the crickets. Where are the feminists now? Showing their true colors and agendas, IMHO. I think it is time we show Iran or North Korea just exactly what technological advances we have made in our tactical nuclear arsenal. Harsh? You betcha. Would it save lives in the long run? You betcha, just like Nagasaki and Hiroshima did. Without the threat of nuclear annihilation, the US and the Soviet Union would have destroyed each other and probably the rest of the world with it.

Well, I guess I don't know exactly what mothers having sons fighting in Iraq has to do with Exxon's profits. I don't see the connection. Tell each of them that Calus (like they are going to know who the hell that is) said thanks to each of them for their sacrifice and may God bring each and every one of them home safely.

SIDE note: I took my 6 year old son about three months ago and stood silently with our hands over our hearts and an American flag in our other hand as a funeral procession passed by on its way to the cemetary with the body of a hero. A local soldier some 20 or 21 years old died fighting in Iraq. The streets were PACKED and LINED--sometimes 2-3 deep. His parents wrote a letter to the local paper thanking everyone and telling the community how overwhelmed and encouraged that all those people showed up to support them. CLASS ACT PARENTS....not like that Cindy Sheehan! Now back to our regular scheduled broadcast!

Exxon took out the ad because of two reasons.....a) There are a lot of govenment educated people who can't even explain the basic law of supply and demand, let alone approach understanding the commodities market and b) they are a business that depends on perception of their customers....even if the customers are way off base in their understanding of WHY the profits are so high, they must manage to it. A company out of business while standing on its principles is still out of business.

I guess I differ from a lot of people in that I am a laissez faire Capitalist. I feel that the government and unions should keep their hands off people's businesses. The law of supply and demand is an extraordinarily powerful thing and, if left alone, is a self governing thing. Unions are the primary reason that FORD and GM are losing 30,000 jobs each....you will have a hard time making me cry for those union folks. People can't afford cars any more because unions jack up the cost of each car so much on benefits and salary that are artificially high. My wife has an uncle that retired from GM and his post-retirement benefits are better than any I have ever had or hope to ever have. Unions in today's world--possibly excepting coal mining or hazardous jobs--are largely unnecessary. If an employer is bad to his/her employees, then they go get jobs elsewhere. When that employer can't find people to work, then he/she must change. Of course, that would go against the feeling that most Americans have that a job is THEIRS to gain or lose and that the employers are in business solely and for no other reason than to provide a job for that person. All profits should be evenly distributed and that owner--despite putting out a large amount of capital--should be paid just like the rest of the employees....but no more than the rest.

America is being flooded with people taught to hate the rich man, despise people that get ahead, and despise achievement. We are teaching our kids to be more and more dependent on government and that is a scary thing.

But that's just me!

I am in a surly mood lately, I gotta admit.

Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Well, I guess I don't know exactly what mothers having sons fighting in Iraq has to do with Exxon's profits. I don't see the connection.

Simple.

They blame Bush for starting the war purely for "oil." They blame these kids for being in their country for this sole purpose.

P.S. I can deal with surly.

 

[calus_3]

If environmentalists are "idiots", then I guess that's me.

Come on folks, name calling is OK in our arguments? People who complain about the gasoline prices are the "liberals", evironmentalists are "idiots". The "liberal" senators don't want to drill in ANWAR (it happens to be quite a few Republicans also).

It's one thing to state your point of view, it's another thing to label, group people in a lump, and name-call.

No the people who complan about gas companies making too much money are making a liberal based argument.

Yes, environmentalists are generally idiots. They disguise their anit-Americanism as environmentalism. Because the only way to further bring America down and hurt the economy is to sell this global warming nonsense and then find a way to saddle America with paying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Ever find it funny that few, if any, environmental groups even talk about China who is the world's largest polluter? Because their agenda is to weaken America. Some even want to make America into a Socialist and or Communist state. They think, depsite resounding failures of both systems across the world and almost without exception, that the problem was with the implementation of socialism / communism not the idea itself. Forget the fact that under both systems the standard of living is pi$$ poor and healthcare is terrible...by golly any and all responsibility for my own life and my living would be off my shoulders. Further, while I am loving life with no responsiibilities for my own existence, no one else is going to get ahead either. IT WILL BE GREAT! P.S. I am a fly fisher and a hunter so I do care greatly about the environment and like preservation but not at the cost of our National Security and / or economic stability.

Liberalism is a disorder that transcends party. Notice, I didn't say Democrats otherwise your argument would be correct. We have quite a few RINOS (Republicans in Name Only) in the Senate that don't support our financial and natural resource independence. I still can't figure that out. I figure that all Senators would say "we have to make sure we are a going concern here in America and then we can argue about the rest". But no.

Well, I seem to remember that there were a lionshare of Senators that said Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII with his nuclear and military build up. Being on the wrong side of history must be a comfortable place because many of our so called leaders have taken up squatter's rights.

JMHO,
Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

No the people who complan about gas companies making too much money are making a liberal based argument.

Yes, environmentalists are generally idiots. They disguise their anit-Americanism as environmentalism. Because the only way to further bring America down and hurt the economy is to sell this global warming nonsense and then find a way to saddle America with paying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Ever find it funny that few, if any, environmental groups even talk about China who is the world's largest polluter? Because their agenda is to weaken America. Some even want to make America into a Socialist and or Communist state. They think, depsite resounding failures of both systems across the world and almost without exception, that the problem was with the implementation of socialism / communism not the idea itself. Forget the fact that under both systems the standard of living is pi$$ poor and healthcare is terrible...by golly any and all responsibility for my own life and my living would be off my shoulders. Further, while I am loving life with no responsiibilities for my own existence, no one else is going to get ahead either. IT WILL BE GREAT! P.S. I am a fly fisher and a hunter so I do care greatly about the environment and like preservation but not at the cost of our National Security and / or economic stability.

Liberalism is a disorder that transcends party. Notice, I didn't say Democrats otherwise your argument would be correct. We have quite a few RINOS (Republicans in Name Only) in the Senate that don't support our financial and natural resource independence. I still can't figure that out. I figure that all Senators would say "we have to make sure we are a going concern here in America and then we can argue about the rest". But no.

Well, I seem to remember that there were a lionshare of Senators that said Ronald Reagan was going to start WWIII with his nuclear and military build up. Being on the wrong side of history must be a comfortable place because many of our so called leaders have taken up squatter's rights.

JMHO,
Cal

Excellent post!~

 

[calus_3]

And one last thing.....for those who oppose drilling in ANWR

Look at the last few weeks in the middle east. We are headed for armageddon over there. Iran elected that kook who some hostages from Carter's administration said was one of the kidnappers. He believes that some profit will only make himself known after several years of jihad type war. He has called for the defeat of Isreal. You have Hamas being elected in Palestine and they have called for the destruction of Israel. That place is like kindling....all it is going to take is a spark. Every oil rich country over there is muslim. If they unite against Israel and the United States and go to war, do you think they are going to continue selling us OIL?

Humping habits of horney caribou aside, we HAVE to start drilling domestially. Add that we get much more oil from Mexico and Central America (can you save CHAVEZ?) and we could end up in serious trouble if a few countries decide to team up and stop oil production. Then you will see high gas prices if we can get any.

I just don't see how no one else but me seems to get that fact. It would be great if we didn't have to touch any land or water to drill oil but that isn't practical and we are headed for disaster if we don't get some independence.

Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

And one last thing.....for those who oppose drilling in ANWR

Look at the last few weeks in the middle east. We are headed for armageddon over there. Iran elected that kook who some hostages from Carter's administration said was one of the kidnappers. He believes that some profit will only make himself known after several years of jihad type war. He has called for the defeat of Isreal. You have Hamas being elected in Palestine and they have called for the destruction of Israel. That place is like kindling....all it is going to take is a spark. Every oil rich country over there is muslim. If they unite against Israel and the United States and go to war, do you think they are going to continue selling us OIL?

Humping habits of horney caribou aside, we HAVE to start drilling domestially. Add that we get much more oil from Mexico and Central America (can you save CHAVEZ?) and we could end up in serious trouble if a few countries decide to team up and stop oil production. Then you will see high gas prices if we can get any.

I just don't see how no one else but me seems to get that fact. It would be great if we didn't have to touch any land or water to drill oil but that isn't practical and we are headed for disaster if we don't get some independence.

Cal

I agree. Ever listen to Michael Savage's radio program? He's constantly saying that we should get at least a barrel of oil for every illegal from Mexico.

 

[calus_3]

Don't cry for me Argentina.

Come get some, you lilly livered 'environmentalist'

Give me proof....not opinion, not some whacked out left-wing "hate America and the World Bank' op-ed piece.....that global warming exists. I will eat my hat.

Give me proof that the warmer temperatures we are experiencing are something other than a normalized cycle of the sun being hotter. Did you happen to know that in recent years the sun has become hotter with several sun spots? Not that the Earth lost its ozone layer (what ever happened to that fallacy?). Not that the atmosphere here on Earth is any worse or better. Fact is that global warming is just about as reliable theory as evolution. It doesn't exist.

Yes, the average temperature is higher but so is the temperature of the sun and it is a cyclical thing. There is evidence at the poles in the ice of warmer and colder years. It is a cyclical thing just like El Nino and El Nina. I love it when Al Gore goes to talk about global warming in NYC and it is like 4 degrees with savage winds. What are all the wack job goobers going to say when all of a sudden the trend shifts and it starts getting colder?!? OMG, GEORGE BUSH AND THE REPUBLICAN CONGRESS STARTED A DAMNED ICE AGE....EVERYBODY RUN!

Prove it.

Cal

 

[calus_3]

I agree. Ever listen to Michael Savage's radio program? He's constantly saying that we should get at least a barrel of oil for every illegal from Mexico.

Savage is funny. I can only take him in small doese though.

I love Neal Boortz most of the time and of course, Clark Howard! If you look really really really closely then you might see some Neal in my posts.

I think we should just swap countries with Mexico. They have better beaches. We take over their oil fields and they get our natural resources. Watch America turn into a hell hole overnight and look for the standard of living on the entire South American continent to improve. The problem with Mexico isn't the people it is that the government is so corrupt that they aren't using the oil resources they have to enrich the people.

Cal

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Savage is funny. I can only take him in small doese though.

I love Neal Boortz most of the time and of course, Clark Howard! If you look really really really closely then you might see some Neal in my posts.

I think we should just swap countries with Mexico. They have better beaches. We take over their oil fields and they get our natural resources. Watch America turn into a hell hole overnight and look for the standard of living on the entire South American continent to improve. The problem with Mexico isn't the people it is that the government is so corrupt that they aren't using the oil resources they have to enrich the people.

Cal

That's not a bad idea. Maybe we should open the border first and allow all the Mexicans into the U.S. first so we can have it all to ourselves?

I agree about Savage in small doses. He cracks me up when he starts screaming at someone, but I can do without his dinner, dog and "celebrity" stories.

 

[j2mirish]

That's not a bad idea. Maybe we should open the border first and allow all the Mexicans into the U.S. first so we can have it all to ourselves?

I agree about Savage in small doses. He cracks me up when he starts screaming at someone, but I can do without his dinner, dog and "celebrity" stories.

I THOUGHT IT ALREADY WAS.

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

I THOUGHT IT ALREADY WAS.

Comeback of the morning, IMO!

 

[lynie]

Wow...if there is one thing I hate it is being generalized....If I am Republican I must be conservative, if I love the out-of-doors and want Caribou to be able to mate where they want I must be an environmentalist and a liberal.
If I am a Democrat I must not want an oil company to make a profit.
To be a good parent I must teach my kids to love money and screw the forests....

Lordy, lordy, lordy...I am so out of here... :hand: :hand: :hand:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Wow...if there is one thing I hate it is being generalized....If I am Republican I must be conservative, if I love the out-of-doors and want Caribou to be able to mate where they want I must be an environmentalist and a liberal.
If I am a Democrat I must not want an oil company to make a profit.
To be a good parent I must teach my kids to love money and screw the forests....

Lordy, lordy, lordy...I am so out of here... :hand: :hand: :hand:

Out of "here," or out of the forum? Don't leave because of one thread! We're just talking!!

I'm a republican who wants to boycott Exxon, so we KNOW generalizations aren't true.

 

[calus_3]

Wow...if there is one thing I hate it is being generalized....If I am Republican I must be conservative, if I love the out-of-doors and want Caribou to be able to mate where they want I must be an environmentalist and a liberal.
If I am a Democrat I must not want an oil company to make a profit.
To be a good parent I must teach my kids to love money and screw the forests....

Lordy, lordy, lordy...I am so out of here... :hand: :hand: :hand:

Easy now.....

1) Not all conservatives are republican and not all republicans are conservative.

2) If you prefer to let the caribou mate at the expense of humans and we are unstable because of it, you are an environmental whack job or an anti-American Capitalism hater.

3) If you are a Democrat, you have to much wrong with you to classify!

4) No one said 'love money' we said love success....big difference. A person to whom freedom is a priority my find success working for the Peace Corp. A person who hunts may find success working for a guide service out west. The difference is that a successful person doesn't hate the rest of the world for achieving THEIR idea of success. Most people who long for progressive tax systems on the hated rich want those who achieve to be taxed disproportionately so that they can live their lifestyle without guilt or without falling behind financially. I say love the results of your choices or make better choices...don't expect the government to drag everyone down to your level.

SARCASM EDITED BY DP - TRYING TO SALVAGE AT LEAST SOME OF THIS POST

Cal

 

[lynie]

Out of "here," or out of the forum? Don't leave because of one thread! We're just talking!!

I'm a republican who wants to boycott Exxon, so we KNOW generalizations aren't true.

:blowkiss:

Certainly not out of WS Jeana...unless you want to get rid of me! And I love talking...and I love hearing all views until I keep hearing one side over and over, and ranting...oh well...

I too am a republican, and I live in Oregon where for years we have had enviromental confrontations....a little owl with spots caused quite the ruckus!
I so love our forests and am so grateful my children have learned to camp and hike and love old growth. Yet I also know that our loggers lost out on their livelyhood because of conservation. Over and over I ask myself, which side is right? My family lost out on a bunch of business because the loggers lost their jobs, but personally there are places that in my mind and heart that God created that we need to be in awe of and respect.

So when I am told that Caribou's can hump anywhere my heart and mind and awe get bruised a bit. And those that are usually spouting off are usually the first ones that bring out God bless American and prayer in schools...
but we are so quick to say it is the for the good of the people and not look back at the things we will not be able to take back or recreate. There are some things that God does not allow us to have do-overs with.

Thanks Jeana, for your calm...and I will leave posting in this thread now because there is too much black and white for my taste...just my opinion of course

 

[Jeana (DP)]

:blowkiss:

Certainly not out of WS Jeana...unless you want to get rid of me! And I love talking...and I love hearing all views until I keep hearing one side over and over, and ranting...oh well...

I too am a republican, and I live in Oregon where for years we have had enviromental confrontations....a little owl with spots caused quite the ruckus!
I so love our forests and am so grateful my children have learned to camp and hike and love old growth. Yet I also know that our loggers lost out on their livelyhood because of conservation. Over and over I ask myself, which side is right? My family lost out on a bunch of business because the loggers lost their jobs, but personally there are places that in my mind and heart that God created that we need to be in awe of and respect.

So when I am told that Caribou's can hump anywhere my heart and mind and awe get bruised a bit. And those that are usually spouting off are usually the first ones that bring out God bless American and prayer in schools...
but we are so quick to say it is the for the good of the people and not look back at the things we will not be able to take back or recreate. There are some things that God does not allow us to have do-overs with.

Thanks Jeana, for your calm...and I will leave posting in this thread now because there is too much black and white for my taste...just my opinion of course

I absolutely don't want to get rid of you! I think there are politicians on both sides who make some sense on these issues. I just have a problem with the radical ones, regardless of party. I guess as llong as the democrats don't start humping the caribous, there's still hope!

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

I absolutely don't want to get rid of you! I think there are politicians on both sides who make some sense on these issues. I just have a problem with the radical ones, regardless of party. I guess as llong as the democrats don't start humping the caribous, there's still hope!

I agree. There's dingbats on both sides of the aisle, IMO. I have pretty strong opinions, but :silenced: . I just lurk to read and learn a few things, and see where my opinions seem to stack up on some subjects compared to our little WS world, haha. (I know on the political forum, I'm definitely a minority, or so it seems; being from the conservative slant and all.)

So, y'all carry on...and Lynie, I hope you stay, as well.

:twocents:

 

[deanws]

Cal if we weren't in a war that a big part of the world accuses us of being in simply for "oil," I wouldn't even think twice about Exxon's profits, I'd just be buying stock. And, I guess to tell you the truth, normally I don't even give a rat's a$$ what the rest of the world thinks of us, they can go to hell. However, I know at least a dozen mothers whose sons are over there doing their jobs for this country and it just isn't right that this oil company made $10 BILLION in profits in THREE MONTHS time. They KNOW it too or they wouldn't have taken out full page ads basically apologzing for how this looks.

One thing you need to consider, is that Exxon bought Mobil. So...it is like combining Wal-mart and Target's profit together as one. That profit margin would sound horribly gaudy also. Just something to think about. The sheer size of the company is huge. Also, no one seems to understand that NOT all that profit comes from gas. They make hundreds of other products.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

One thing you need to consider, is that Exxon bought Mobil. So...it is like combining Wal-mart and Target's profit together as one. That profit margin would sound horribly gaudy also. Just something to think about. The sheer size of the company is huge. Also, no one seems to understand that NOT all that profit comes from gas. They make hundreds of other products.

The arab community doesen't think we're at war with Iraq to get our hands on cheaper t-shirts. So, comparing an oil company with $10 BILLION in profits in three months to Walmart just doesn't work.