MURRIETA OPEN FORUM - Get it said, get it read, communications for the community.

Sunday, August 28, 2005

There's another gas protest on Sept. 9

This one supposedly started in Ohio, I probably won't need any gas on September 9th anyway, so why not? It'll no doubt hurt the small gas-station owner in the short term, but if enough people do it, it might send a signal to Washington (not the oil refining and energy companies).

Question du jour: Do Americans who drive gas-guzzling SUV's have American servicemen's blood on their hands?

posted by J. L. Kunkle at Sunday, August 28, 2005

36 Comments:

  • Economic realities do not change just because people protest. The United States will either be a controlling economic and political force in the world, or we get back to hoofing it. I say lets prepare in both ways... Keep control of the world's oil supply by economic (preferably not military) means, and get busy working on those riding trails all around Murrieta.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 28, 2005 8:22:00 AM  

  • I just wrote at 8:22, but want to add one more thing. I'm serious about that riding trail bit. How about it? Why not keep the tradition of the Murrieta ranch lifestyle. To whatever degree it can be done, how about horse riding trails all over town?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 28, 2005 8:31:00 AM  

  • Let's pretend that California discovered 2 million barrels of extra oil supply tommorrow. Would prices come down? Maybe a little. The problem would be that there is no way to refine any additional oil . The refineries we have are running at full capacity. No new refineries have been built in over 20 years and many independent California refineries have shut their doors in the last 10 year. I think that 5 companies now control 90 percent of California's refinery capacity. There are no plans for new refineries in left leaning California. I think the market conditions are set for additional price increases. It's like a perfect storm. There is increasing demand and a near stagnant supply. The answer is more refineries or eliminating the over 40 different types of gasoline formulations used across the U.S. The different formulations makes interstate gas trading extremely difficult.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 28, 2005 2:49:00 PM  

  • Rholgrem said,

    Let's pretend that California discovered 2 million barrels of extra oil

    Rholgrem, there is plenty of oil off the California coast I do believe the state several years ago has banned new drilling.

    8:22 made an excellent point; it’s all supply and demand. Sure you can boycott one day but then the next day people will flood the gas stations to fill up their tanks which will nullify the boycott, the answer is people need to conserve energy boycotts are useless when you have commodity that is a necessity and it always takes something like this for this to happen, but that’s human nature. You think it’s bad now…Katrina just made it worse.

    J.L. Kunkle, I cannot believe that you even hinted at the fact that SUV owners have blood on their hands; I’m so incensed by that comment. I own an SUV and was AGAINST the action in Iraq. I have friends over there and I don’t need you laying a guilt trip on me if, God forbid, something bad happens to them. That is all I’m going to say about that.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 28, 2005 5:41:00 PM  

  • Mike I don't like offshore drilling either. I was just trying to point out that refinery capacity plays a huge role in the supply and demand equation. Even if oil supplies increased there is little that can be done in the short term to increase refinery capacity. The SUV comment was a over the top. The fact is that without oil almost every part of the economy would grind to a halt. So JL if SUV owners have blood on their hands then so do the people who consume products made from oil byproducts. JL maybe you were also guilty last night when you turned on that light in your house and the electricity was generated from an oil burning power plant. Let's face it JL the war for oil is the battle to maintain our way of living. Freedom and oil are interdependent aren't they?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 28, 2005 6:02:00 PM  

  • Councilman Seyarto: I'd like to read your take on the future of the gas/oil situation, and how the city may be doing it's part. I understand from what I've read in the past (newspapers, etc) that Murrieta is putting some emphasis on building a city in which people work, live and shop in a quality environment; each part in very close proximity to the others in regard to communte times (and of course in regard to minimizing gas consumption). I'm just one private citizen presenting his own opinion, but I feel this basic concept deserves priority in all the areas of city planning. It appears in fact to be exactly what is happening in Murrieta, and I was wondering if you could confirm that fact. And if I am right in thinking that this is the path the city has chosen, can you tell us who was it that had the foresight to start Murrieta in this direction?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 8:28:00 AM  

  • 8:28 You sound like the Chamber of Commerce and an election is coming soon!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 12:49:00 PM  

  • I agree with most of what's said here about SUV's and the connection they have to the War in Iraq. Very little. I also think we as a community should step up pressure for the automobile and oil companies to help come up with solutions. But with no pressure why should they? The oil companies' profits don't remain the same, they at the same time increase more often then not more then the pump prices. The auto companies may not be raking it in, but why should they spend more on ideas when we buy what they produce now. It's up to Washington to step in and say enough is enough. But we don't put pressure on them either. We just step up and fill it up. We need the boys in Washington to TELL the oil companies to fix the refinery problems and the many types of mixtures. They say they can make tires at the same cost of the ones on our cars today at relatively the same cost that will last forever and can be recycled. But what would that do to all the aftermarket sales. The same thing with almost every replacement and wear part on autos and electronics.

    So if we really are concerned with Homeland Security and "our way of life" then we need to start at home, with the Corporations that have profits doubling as the consumer struggles. Instead, like Rholmgren alluded to, we are OK fighting a war, to secure oil at the costs of young men and our tax money, while oil companies pay their executives hundreds of millions. We are OK, spending money on the people of Iraq for their infrastruture but not OK with increasing Social Security benefits or Medicare. Someone help me understand? Although I think Hussian needed to go, was it worth thousands of casualties and hundreds of billions of dollars? All it's done is give oil companies more contracts and more oil to make more and more profits on. I wonder what our President was thinking here, being that he is an oil man?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 1:19:00 PM  

  • Jeff: Some rare common ground. On the mixtures issue. Up until about ten years ago California was able to trade gas with other states. Surplus refinery capacity could be used in one state to meet demand in another state. Then in all its wisdom California mandated gas blends that are almost exclusive to this state. I think there is a "summer" blend and a "winter" blend. As I mentioned in a previous post there are more than 40 blends now across the U.S. The best thing that Washington could do would be to demand that all states make the same gasoline formulation. To appease any environmental concerns let's demand that the blend is one of the cleanest burning formulations. Gasoline could then again be traded freely between states and a suplus of gas in one state could be shipped via pipline to meet a gasoline shortfall in another state. I have confidence that in the long term gasoline will be replaced by either electric or hydrogen power. On a short term basis gas is all we have and the complicated formulation issue should be simplified to the benefit of all.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 3:33:00 PM  

  • Dear 12:49
    No, I'm not the CofC. But if the CofC had posed the same kind of question to Councilman Seyarto, I would understand. There are some very positive things about the way this city has been planned. I personally would like to see an even greater emphasis given to kind of planning that my question to the Councilman was based on. The question relates to facts. If you don't happen to like those facts, well... C'est la vie! That's life in the big city. Credit should go where credit is due.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 6:08:00 PM  

  • Good post Jeff, Toyota has back orders on their hybrid Prius which gets 60 miles to the gallon in the city, they are also ramping up production on other hybrid models so there are some car companies that are improving the miles per gallon. I just wonder why the American automobile companies are lagging behind.

    Instead of spending billions of dollars on the war in Iraq, that money could have been used for tax credits for people who spend money on energy conserving products not just cars, like solar panels for the homes for example or even businesses. Give chemical companies tax credits, or any company, that replaces their oil based products with a non oil base product. Instead of lost lives, the billions of wasted dollars could have created jobs and at the same time lesson our dependence on oil.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 6:48:00 PM  

  • Jeff: There is no way that either Social Security of Medicare should be expanded. Those progams are so bloated with overhead and fat already. Way too many people collect SSI benefits long before they reach retirement age. If Seniors want benefit increases then eliminating those who sponge off the system long before their retirement age would leave more money for those who truly need it. The Seniors over 65. I read somewhere that nearly half of all Social Security recepients are no where near the retirement age. The information I am recalling is kind of old though (4 or 5 years). Personally I have no faith that Social Security will do much to take care of me in retirement. Jeff you would be wiser to fend for yourself than to depend on a government pittance. The retirees in my family that were long term investors are living extremely well. On the other hand there are other members of my extended family who depend entirely on SS. They were shortsighted and believed the government would take care of them. They are now living meager check to meager check.They should have had a plan to be more self sufficient.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 6:49:00 PM  

  • 8:28,
    Is that a setup question or what? Let's see, who set up this direction that the city has, Councilmen Seyarto? To who's credit to we owe such a grand plan that three of our Councilmen were on the verge of recall? Could it be JVH, KS and for a short time big mac? This question was either asked by a Van Haaster support, neighbor or friend or Himself. Don't any of us think that he does not read everything on here. I have already had an e-mail from McAlister so I know they read it. I viewed the grand plan as I sat on Murrieta Hot Springs trying to get to the 15. Want to know how long it took? But, we are planning to make it better by building more business along that stretch and maybe the backup will reach down along Winchester from the North. So I ask 8:28, are you a Van Haaster supporter?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 6:55:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren,
    I have already fended for myself, thanks for thinking about me. I will not have to rely on SS. But many more people are not so fortunate and these are the ones I want some security for. Not everyone has the education and ability to have 401K plans and pensions. It doesn't make them deadbeats. They grew up relying on this plan and now they face retirement without all the money they expected. But they are the backbone of America and just like veterns face less and less for all they gave.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 6:59:00 PM  

  • Mike: It takes zero brainpower to Monday morning quarterback what should have been done in Iraq.

    Jeff: It takes zero morality to make a gross charge that our President was not acting in good faith on the best known information available regarding WMD's.

    At least it looks like you two have found something you can cozy up to each other with. Everything works out in the end. Isn't that sweet?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 7:02:00 PM  

  • Anon 7:02,

    From the very beginning I didn’t think we should have went into Iraq, since I didn’t have any input on that decision or even support that decision there was no “Monday morning quarterbacking” here.

    So do you have anything to meaningful contribute? Or is that the best you can do is throw out insults?

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 7:15:00 PM  

  • Rholgrem,

    I agree in a way, but the money is taxed that should be put into a personal account unlike S.S. where the government can take money from, if S.S. had been untouched and not used for other government programs S.S. would be in great shape. For older people it’s too late so it should be a phased in system.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 7:27:00 PM  

  • Gee Mike, no one was trying to hurt your feelings. Maybe you were part of the intelligence community that was decimated and sent packing when the Clintons were in power. If fact, maybe you were THE ONE who had the TRUTH about what was and was not in Iraq. Was there no way you could reach the President with your special knowledge? Did they stop you at the White House gates, and threaten you not to tell anyone what you knew? Unless the answer to that question is yes, Mike, you're either an armchair general or a monday morning quarterback. It's all basically the same thing. Don't insult the intelligence of everyone reading, Mike. Admit that you don't have a real clue about anything of substance regarding this subject.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 7:32:00 PM  

  • Anon 7:32,

    Fine you win, I’m not going to exchange insults with you.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 7:37:00 PM  

  • Anyone notice how quickly 7:27 was answered? No one thinks that fast. I think Mike is pulling a fast one. Did you answer yourself, Mike? Clever way to make an argument, but not clever timing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 9:03:00 PM  

  • 9:03,
    The same old thing. WMD's, Clinton attacks. Where have you been? It's easy for most of us to see that Bush wanted to invade Iraq from the start of his Presidency. We have the British telling us this in memos, we have Plumegate now, we have Powell resigning and many other cabinet members after the first term because of embarrasment with being misled by the President. You didn't see our President standing up at the United Nations did you? He sent Powell to lie. Mission Accomplished!!! Where are we today. Mission to be completed never. Soon we will see indictments on the fact that so many lies and coverups were made after the fact. Bush is telling the nation about uranium that he knew didnt happen. He is so misleading that he's still telling us that Iraq had something to do with 9-11. Thats our President. Mr. Honesty. The same President that didn't fulfill his tour of duty. The same one that has so much integrity that he can't come out and say that he was wrong. Monday Morning QBing? Anyone that can look past Fox News pep rallies, the Limbaugh's and Hannity's and O'Reily's of the world can see we were misled and still are. Wasn't it Cheney who said recently that said the insurgentcy was in it's last throes. These are pure misleading comments that they make and will continue to make. But, alas, public opinion is what....about 35% feel we were right to go to war. Another 60% think Bush lied. So, Bud, you are the one now having to defend what's indefensible. And two more died today, for your WMD'S. You want to argue this war? The only WMD's were the ones in Cheney, Wolfowiz, Rove, Bush's closet. You remember them, they are the ones Rumsfeld sold to Hussian back in the 80's.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 9:27:00 PM  

  • Jeff, 9:03 agrees. But look at the timing on the responses. Mike's the one who's not on board. Think about it. Supposedly someone happened to (1) Read Mike's "response" (2) consider how to "respond back" (3) type out a whole paragraph that is a little too clever and (4) get it posted back. All in less than six minutes. Not likely. I think Mike is taking us for a ride and laughing all the way.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Monday, August 29, 2005 10:24:00 PM  

  • If Jeff's 9:27 tantrum is the best the left can do, it's no wonder we're at war. Hey Jeff, who loves ya baby? Can you tell the difference between friend and foe, even in this blog?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 6:42:00 AM  

  • 10:24... In my opinion, Mike is wrong about second guessing our government's difficult struggle to do the right thing, but he seems sincere. He's not trying to fool anyone. He was smart enough to stop responding after 7:32, and that says a lot for him.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 9:44:00 AM  

  • 9:27,
    I am not left but I view things as best for me and my family and neighbors. I don't need no stinking ideology like you. Don't you love my tantrums?
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 5:25:00 PM  

  • 5:25 (Jeff) - The 9:27, to whom you were responding, was yourself. Maybe Kelly was right. Maybe drugs are involved.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 5:37:00 PM  

  • Anon 10:24 as for timing it was 17 minutes that Anon 7:32 responded to my post made at 7:15 not 6 minutes, my post at 7:27 was to Rholmgren without a reply. So no I’m not responding to myself under different user names. I have no motive for do something like that.

    10:24, this has been tough war, I did support what we did in Afghanistan but I think we jumped in too fast into Iraq without getting enough support from our European allies. There was doubt at the time for them not wanting to get involved, which actually put doubts in my head at the time, George Bush Sr. had done a better job diplomatically in getting our allies involved, although I have to admit it was a different circumstance.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 6:29:00 PM  

  • Only high on life.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, August 30, 2005 7:55:00 PM  

  • The sins of the father being visited on the son. Bush Sr. was extremely well placed to topple Hussein in the first Gulf War, but he didn't follow through and left many Shiites prepared to revolt high and dry (and dead).

    My SUV remark I admit was slightly adolescent, but I was actually trying to indicate the mindset of the type of person who would derive pleasure from having (and feeding) a huge SUV. Conspicuous consumption is boorish.

    By Blogger J. L. Kunkle, at Thursday, September 01, 2005 3:21:00 PM  

  • J.L. Kunkle,

    I have to admit, I over reacted. I can understand the thought was to make us think as Americans the way we consume oil like it was an endless supply of water.

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, September 01, 2005 6:15:00 PM  

  • MIKE: WOULD YOU PLEASE STOP BEING SO $#!@# CALM AND POLITE IN YOUR POSTS. IT IS ANNOYING, AND YOU'RE MAKING ALL THE REST OF US LOOK EVEN WORSE THAN WE ARE.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, September 01, 2005 7:16:00 PM  

  • It may be not be news to anyone but there is no shortage of oil. There is a shortage of refinery capacity and a distrition problem though. As a matter of fact look at what the EPA did: They temporarily lifted all of their complicated formulation requirements. Now New York gas can be shipped to Illinois for the first time in years. The EPA said that removing the restrictions would help put a downward pressure on prices. States could trade gas with other states again. It lasts only until Sept 15. You would think that such an order should be made permanent. We need to promote a more competitive gas markets and this policy would help alot. We also need to drill for more oil (ANWR) and expand and build refineries. To me it makes no sense to be running our refineries at 98 percent capacity. Any disruptions from fire or malfunctions causes the price of gas to spike. It would be better to meet our demand with more refineries running at 85 percent capacity. There is only one problem. The Democrats do not want more refineries or more oil supplies. So while they are crying about the high prices in the media, the Democrats actually promote agendas that lead to the higher prices. And they use the courts to tie the projects up for year and years. Look at ANWR. It was first proposed that we drill there in '95. The oil companies wanted to use 2000 acres out of millions to drill for oil. If that project was allowed in '95 we would have another MILLION BARRELS of oil PER DAY right now. Unfortunately the Democrats and their allies continue to throw a monkey wrench into domestic oil production.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, September 01, 2005 9:41:00 PM  

  • Anon 7:16

    Sorry…no wait no I’m not, or yes I am? Ahhh whatever.

    Rholmgren ,

    Look for the Exxon Mobile’s of the world to make record profits next quarter, but then after that I don’t see it happening, I totally agree with your post. Sure you can release oil but unless you can refine it not much is going to improve.

    One last thing, if you can donate to relief from Hurricane Katrina here’s one place I did:

    http://www.redcross.org/

    Mike

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, September 02, 2005 6:58:00 PM  

  • Good advice Mike I made my donation today. People need to put aside their criticisms and take actions. I admire all the thousands of people who have offered their private homes as shelter. I also am deeply moved by the Hollywood actors like Nicholas Cage who donated a million dollars of his own money. I also have a deep respect for those who stuck around and tried to maintain order. I heard that almost half of the New Orleans police force quit instead of reporting for dangerous duty.This event is proof that sometimes no matter how much planning is done a natural disaster can easily overwhelm our humanity and resources.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, September 02, 2005 10:40:00 PM  

  • Rholmgren,
    Thats the good old party line.....don't attack our President. He is a joke.

    He's an embarrassement. Even conservative papers are attacking him left and right......did you see that Condi got new shoes? Aren't they beautiful?

    We need to do more then give money as I have done and gave clothing and blankets today. Now is the time to stand up and say to Mr. Bush.......enough already. Let's stop supporting Iraq and get back here and build our infrastructure....remember Rholmgren, the one in all my posts I said we should be spending that trillion dollars on....remember Mr conservative?

    You call me a coward.....should hang myself.......I want whats best for us.....not for the conservative cause.......we need to turn away from all of that and work for the good of America......but all you know is your fear and hate....your the true loser.
    Jeff

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, September 02, 2005 11:21:00 PM  

  • Jeff I never said you should hang yourself. You lefties need to stop twisting words around to suit your purpose. I said if I thought like you I would hang myself. You are obviously comfortable with your twisted way of thinking.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, September 07, 2005 8:47:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

 
Google