# Hats off to Earl



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

> Even though the National Energy Tax narrowly passed the House 219-212, your member of Congress, Earl Pomeroy courageously voted "no" against this job-killing bill. In fact, he was one of 44 Democrats who voted "no."


Credit where credit is due. Although he certainly knew it would've been political suicide otherwise.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

All kinds of thoughts run through my head on that one. It's good that he voted against it, but I am reluctant to give him credit. Did he do it for the right reasons, or did he feel forced? It would be great if he really is against it and has the nerve to stick with that decision.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

The 44 Dems who voted against it are all in districts where they may face stiff challenges come the 2010 election. For some who are not to observant in the political maneuvering of people like Pooperboy, and Dorgan, it is time for you to do so.

They knew well in advance what the vote on the Dem side was, and as the few Rep crossed over it allowed for more breathing room for people like Pooperboy to vote NO! Peterson is not going to face any real competition in the 7th District and sold his people out, claiming he did so simply to make sure certain things where in for Ag.

So Earl does not deserve any credit, if he had gotten up and urged a NO vote on this then I would say he earned it.

Remember when Conrad rolled out his program to increase private land access? He was coming up for re-election! Did we see Conrad much at all during the flooding this past spring? No! It was Dorgan and Pooperboy posing for the cameras and doing the rah rah speeches on the radio talk show programs.

During drought issues it was Conrad who was always on the radio and TV not Dorgan because he was running.

So get a clue, and understand that they have sold us out for party power and the party in return gives them a free pass to vote against them when they have the numbers.

Watch this bill in the Senate and see if either of our Sen do a thing to protect coal generated electricity which is 90% of what most ND uses!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> So Earl does not deserve any credit, if he had gotten up and urged a NO vote on this then I would say he earned it.


That's kind of what I was thinking. I also agree that if he had not been coming up for election he would have voted yes. If the vote would have been close I think he would also have been called on by the democrat party to vote yes. I doubt he would have argued with them.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Ron Gilmore said:


> So get a clue, and understand that they have sold us out for party power and the party in return gives them a free pass to vote against them when they have the numbers.


Geez!! You make it sound as I am campaigning for him or would vote for the ding dong. :lol:

I am taking this at face value strictly, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

> If the vote would have been close I think he would also have been called on by the democrat party to vote yes.


That is what I expected to read and hoped for, but he would not have survived another election here as long as the republicans could have put up any sort of contender.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

4CurlRedleg said:


> > If the vote would have been close I think he would also have been called on by the democrat party to vote yes.
> 
> 
> That is what I expected to read and hoped for, but he would not have survived another election here as long as the republicans could have put up any sort of contender.


My thoughts are the same. They liked those RINO's who voted for it because it let their weaker candidates within the democrat party vote no and impress their constituents back home.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

4curl, my statement was meant for all, I was not singling you out. One has to look hard at the body of work they have done, and like a old friend said, one time.



> If a rapist and murderer saved your life, it does not wipe out his past deeds!


I look at the Three Stooges from ND with the same eye!


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Well said Ron.

Alot of people dont realize the kind of "tag team" politics they play.

On a side note, this kind of crap is the PRECISE reason we need term limits for senators and congress persons.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

> I look at the Three Stooges from ND with the same eye!


Same here.

Conrad and Dorgan will not vote for it either on the same premise. It will get harder to be a democrat from ND in the near future, especially with a budget surplus that certainly does not make Obama happy. No leverage on that front.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

Who exactly is Pomeroy's stiff competition, Duane Sand again?

Earl has won the last few elections by default. I don't think even he is dumb enough to vote for cap and trade. Conrad won't vote for it either but his reasons maybe closer to Earl's

You are all dead wrong on Dorgan. He has been working on clearing up red tape to get more refining in ND and he is a supporter of expanding coal here is the link:
http://www.basinelectric.com/About_Us/A ... index.html

Here is a link on oil that is not biased, I found it interesting:
http://www.kxmc.com/Voices/Blogs/248316.asp

I expect our reps to vote against drilling anywhere but here. Why drill in anwr, the rockies, and other sensitive areas (hurricane zones) when we can drill in ND, MT, and WY? Drill here drill now to them should mean ND. It is all kind of a weird argument when all the crude in the world won't matter until we increase refining capacities.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

The Oil business is all about market strategy not production or refining but simply to get the most out of a limited product. In all honesty there hasn't been a shortage since WWII, just hedging and speculating. :beer:


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

buckseye said:


> The Oil business is all about market strategy not production or refining but simply to get the most out of a limited product. In all honesty there hasn't been a shortage since WWII, just hedging and speculating. :beer:


Right except until we can refine our own oil production doesn't matter


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Well I have a bit of an inside edge on this and the refineries are keeping up to the market strategy perfectly. Little rumors here and there are what drives the market and actually the entire oilfield.

It will be a long time until we are done using up the undeveloped nations energy sources :beer:


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

buckseye said:


> Well I have a bit of an inside edge on this and the refineries are keeping up to the market strategy perfectly. Little rumors here and there are what drives the market and actually the entire oilfield.
> 
> It will be a long time until we are done using up the undeveloped nations energy sources :beer:


What about the diesel shortage last fall. Three times I either couldn't get fuel or couldn't fill completely full. I thought that we still need gas/fuel refined in other countries to fill our demands.

I agree on the rumors driving the market, all the more reason not to drill in volitile areas. Weather, political, etc why not drill in more stable areas like ND


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Tk there are at least two things that we need to look at in regards to supply and prices as well as shortages.

First on the supply side, I have watched the profit margins and such of many of the refinery operations and it is not a lucrative business with a lot of risk. Thus it is no wonder that most small independent operations have closed or sold. Regulations and cost of upgrades have made it really a poor investment especially when importation of refined fuel is coming in cheaper than it can be made here. Upside of that is we as consumers have over the years benefited from this. Downside is the risk of shortages if suddenly that supply is disrupted for any reason.

Changes mandated by our Gov caused some of diesel the shortage, many plants where either not running or running at reduced capacity as a result. Some I truly believe was a market manipulation to increase profits, and issues such as pipeline capacity and such where used as a scape goat.

Which leads us to the next point and that is who is going to build new refineries and how will they deliver the product once it is produced. One of the big things regarding the discussion about a refinery owned by the state of ND was two fold, one was oil supply and the other delivery. Even the Indian Refinery which has been fast tracked is dealing with these very issues right now. Even though we have pipelines running across the state, they are not owned by the state.

Thus those in the refinery business are facing the fact that increased supply lowers profits when demand drops. Knowing this what incentive do they have to build new refineries especially with the nations leadership pushing to tax fossil fuel based energy at outrageous levels. If it was me, I would not lay out that kind of investment!

So Dorgan's push is being beat back by the policy positions that his party leadership is pushing. So what good is he really doing?


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

Dorgan's efforts may be all in vein given what most of the rest of his party and 8 house republicans want to do. At least he is trying, as illustrated above he is not a cap and trader, that is the point here at least.

The gov't and it's bonehead epa laws are mostly to blame imo, namely the low sulfur diesel and the particle filter regen systems on diesels. Manipulation is a factor also, last summer for whatever reason two or three major refineries were shut down at the same time for maintenance. Who knows what the reasons were, they maybe had to shut down to tie in the upgrades they had to make for the low sulfur diesel. 

As you and Buckseye have said we are no where near energy independence and cap and trade is just another name for taxes. Going about it the way the cap and traders want to will get us no closer to energy independence either.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

TK33 said:


> buckseye said:
> 
> 
> > Well I have a bit of an inside edge on this and the refineries are keeping up to the market strategy perfectly. Little rumors here and there are what drives the market and actually the entire oilfield.
> ...


There was no shortage, although the plant in Billings had a small fire that shut it down for a few weeks. My friends that haul fuel just had to fill in Fargo for a little while and that changed the supply in the Fargo area but only in the Fargo area for a couple days.


----------



## Candiru (Aug 18, 2005)

In case nobody has used this yet, I want to be the first. Let's just think of him as: 
*Representitive Pelosiroy.*


----------

