• Follow us now on

    "That some should be rich, shows that others may become rich, and, hence, is just encouragement to industry and enterprise."

    -- President Abraham Lincoln - 1864

    "The supply-side claim is not a claim. It is empirically true and historically convincing that with lower rates of taxation on labor and capital, the factors of production, you'll get a bigger economy."

    -- U.S. Rep. Jack Kemp

  • Special Election – Jan 12, 2010

  • 2010

  • 2013

  • SeaWorld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund

    In a fight between Jim Webb and Ollie North, who would win? Oh, that's right, we already know the answer to that question.

    Potential 2012 Convention Cities:

      Republicans

    • Atlanta, GA
    • Indianapolis, IN
    • San Antonio, TX

      • Democrats

    • Like we care.

    Potential 2012 Presidential Candidates:

  • Current Poll Questions

    No Current Polls.

    Visit Our Sponsors

    Advertise here

    Join Team Sarah!

  • Open Threads

    2010 Elections

    2011 Elections

    2012 Elections

    2013 Elections and Beyond

  • Poll Accuracy Based Results

    Election 2009 actual results: Bob McDonnell 58.6 percent for a 17.4 percent margin of victory. Virtucon rankings are based upon total amount the two numbers deviate from the actual numbers.

    1. Survey USA (10/30-11/1) – 58% / 18% (deviation 1.2%)

    2. VCU (10/21-25) – 54% / 18% (deviation 5.2%)

    3. (TIE) PPP (10/31-11/1) – 56% / 14% (deviation 6%)

    3. (TIE) Roanoke College (10/21-27) – 53% / 17% (deviation 6%)

    5. Suffolk Univ. (10/26-28) – 54% / 14% (deviation 8%)

    6. Rasmussen (10/27) – 54% / 13% (deviation 9%)

    7. Washington Post (10/22-25) – 55% / 11% (deviation 10%)

    8. Times Dispatch / Mason Dixon (10/28-29) – 53% / 12% (deviation 11%)

    9. Daily Kos / Research 2000 (10/26-28) – 54% / 10% (deviation 12%)

    10. Virginia Pilot / CNU (10/8-13) – 45% / 14% (deviation 17%)

    11. Clarus (10/18-19) – 49% / 8% (deviation 19%)

    Next time you see a poll, judge it by its past performance. Here is how they rank in terms of accuracy based upon the 2008 presidential election:

    1T. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**

    1T. Pew (10/29-11/1)**

    3. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)

    4. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)

    5. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*

    6T. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*

    6T. ARG (10/25-27)*

    8T. CNN (10/30-11/1)

    8T. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)

    10. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)

    ----------------

    (If you're below DailyKos, you don't deserve to be taken seriously for another four years. Better luck in 2012.)

    11. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)

    12. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)

    13. FOX (11/1-2)

    14. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)

    15. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)

    16. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)

    17. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)

    18. Marist College (11/3)

    19. CBS (10/31-11/2)

    20. Gallup (10/31-11/2)

    21. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)

    22. CBS/Times (10/25-29)

    23. Newsweak (10/22-23)

  • RSS Redskins Insider

Getting New Oil To Market Fast And Why Dems Don’t Want That

Posted on July 1, 2008 by Riley

TruTV’s (formerly CourtTV) new ”actuality” series “Black Gold” proves that, contrary to what Democrats and enviro-weenies would have you believe, it doesn’t take years to pump oil out of the ground once you know where it is.  It only takes about two MONTHS between the time construction is begun on an offshore oil platform and when oil can start being pumped out.  (Think about how much faster an operation can be established on land, say in ANWR, where you don’t have to build an offshore rig.)

As for the millions of acres already leased to oil and gas companies that are not being developed, maybe that is because there isn’t anything there to extract.  But that is, to borrow Manbearpig’s best friend’s phrase, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Want to know one of the reasons why Democrats don’t want us to drill for more oil in order to lower gas and home heating oil prices? Here it is from the mouth of Sen. Maj. Ldr. Harry Reid (D-Nev.)

That, plus they want high gas prices. They want it politically so they can blame President Bush and Republicans. They want it so they can force us to change our way of life and get us out of our cars and onto mass transit or living in cities instead of the suburbs.

Make no mistake about this. We can get the oil and we can get it fast. Democrats just don’t want us to do it.

Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.

Filed under: Congress, Democrats, Energy

« »

3 Responses

  1. Martin, on July 1st, 2008 at 10:23 pm Said:

    Hmm, the weird thing is that the government’s own Energy Administration say that if work started on the ANWR tomorrow, the first barrel would come out of the ground in 2018. I think your understanding of the work involved

    http://layscience.net/?q=node/156

  2. Riley, on July 1st, 2008 at 11:10 pm Said:

    Well, the Energy Admin. is including the time it takes for the gov’t to issue permits, conduct studies, allow for lawsuits, etc. The physical act of removing the oil can be accomplished much faster.

  3. BullElephant, on July 2nd, 2008 at 12:52 pm Said:

    Also keep in mind that initiating offshore drilling with a rig is a much quicker process than shore-based drilling. The offshore rig comes already built (and very expensive), and the driller basically just tows and anchors it into place, whereas in a place like ANWR all of that drilling infrastructure takes significantly longer to get in place. But not 10 years.

    Riley’s larger point is spot-on.

Leave a Reply