I heard the strategy behind this a few days ago.

Apparently the Democrats did a poll where they found only 25% directly blame them for high gas prices. This poll also made Bush out to be the bad guy. But apparently they thought their push poll was a legit poll and are making their whole strategy behind this poll with the assumption that most of America will blame Bush and not them.

I guess they will be airing ads soon to try to reinforce this idea.

However on the talk show *Either Rush Limbaugh or Lars Larson* the other guy predicted a record educational year of Republican educational ads showing the truth behind the history.

And so there might be a chance to see a record number of Democrats kicked out of office this election cycle, and a record number of Republicans voted in against the odds. All based upon the oil factor and Democrats lock stepped approach towards preventing drilling, refining, and reducing the hassle factor for getting permits to drill. Yes hassle effects since environmentalists nearly universally file complaints during the whole process and should be put in jail each time their lawsuits fail under new frivolous lawsuit laws that should be passed.

Actually, I thought this thread would get much more attention than  the Obama the socialist, and Obama the messiah threads.

Go figure.

I don't get why conservatives in america want to drill now...

you need to wait a couple of decades until other oil sources have run out then start drilling your own oil...

this way the USA will have oil for much longer.

(EDIT)

If ur worried about prices now wait 15-25 years when oil production capacity will lower greatly.
wouldn't it be nice to have a large untapped reserve then?

if the us-government would lower gas prices the outcome would be short lived. lower prices would mean more consume and would rally the oil price up. after a short time the price would be the same, but the government would have grave problems in the budget.
drilling oil has no short effects, it is a mid time investment. real effects on prices would start not after several years. in the same time world reserves would have dropped, so that alaska oil would just fill the gap with no effects on prices.
people accept it, the good times are over and we have to create a new age. we must work on "clean" energy concepts.

personally i am sure that all the talks and demands about lower gas prices are only a campaign gag. after the elections no politican will remember their own words, because it is simply too expensive to lower the prices.

"As to oil running out ??.....  Its been the mantra of the Environmental wing for many decades.  Its just not true. 
Its a theory."

Well it will happen eventually because the rate at which we consume fossil fuels is faster than they can be replensihed.  So eventually we will run out of oil, will it be soon?  I don't know I'm guessing probably not in my life time though.

Haven't read the full link but if this issue wasn't brought up until after the House adjourned that's pretty low.  If you wait until your opponent has left to start calling them out on not addressing an issue that just shows that your position is so flimsy you couldn't risk letting it face scrutiny.  Now if the issue was raised in the House, and I mean this particular session, and just never resolved that's different, but like I said if they waited til the Dems were gone that's pathetic.

"Eventually.......  how do you know this ??  You dont.  Fields of oil have been predicted to dry up for years, and keep on pumping and REGENERATING...as well."

You're right I don't know 100% that we'll run out of oil.  However I've yet to hear a credible theory on the formation of fossil fuels that doesn't agree the process takes a significantly long time.  So it stands to reason that if we're consuming something at a certain rate and it replenishes at anything slower than that it will eventually run out.

"DPS...read the entire thread then.   The Minority party was shut out, and the Majority LEADER, the House speaker, called for Adjournment w/o the house entirety closing.

It was RAISED before adjournment.  Its why the Republicans....are STILL as I write this, on Monday the 4th, in the house now. 

w/o cameras.
w/o microphones.
w/o lights."

Wow, clearly you missed the word "if" in my post.  I said if it wasn't brought up this tactic of bringing it up afterwards and claiming it hasn't been resolved is low.  All you needed to say was, "It was brought up before the House was adjourned but never resolved." and it would have satisfied to change my criticism.

Now the reason I hadn't read the link was because I had to go to work, and the reason I still haven't read the link is because I just got back from work and it's midnight so I'm going to bed.  However I will say that if the issue was never resolved in House then I'd have to agree with the Republicans, I say that so rarely it kinda feels weird.  I reserve harsher judgement, for the Democrats, for tomorrow morning when I'll actually be able to read the article.

/me waits for McCain to tell the Republicans to be nicer