The Sands of Change

2011 February 1
by drdog09

Oil Sands that is…. Black Gold, Texas Tea…..Brrrrppp. Sorry wrong show. —

That means that while Americans are buying oil at just over $90 a barrel, the price Europeans and Asians are paying is already over $100. And if the turmoil in Egypt spreads to its oil fields and the Suez Canal, a major transit point for European supplies, that spread could expand even more.

But so far the spread, which began widening before demonstrators took to the streets of Cairo, has little to do with the Middle East. It is mostly about a big buildup of crude in the Cushing, Okla., oil depot. Cushing is flush partly because demand in the United States is only slowly recovering. But most of all, it is a result of increasing imports of refined synthetic oil produced from Canadian oil sands, now the single most important source of imported oil.

Canadian oil producers love the way that Americans are growing increasingly dependent on them as opposed to our trading partners in the Persian Gulf. It is no coincidence that while most of the world’s stock exchanges experienced declines on Friday related to the crisis in Egypt, the Canadian stock market rallied. Particularly strong were the oil sands company stocks.


If this is to be believed (It is NYT you know) then you know what? If the Muzzies want to burn down their neighborhood, who are we to stop them? Here is an extra can of gas so you get it done right.

But I just can’t quite get it in my head the idea of Dudley Dooright riding in an old Model A truck to the theme song of the Beverly Hillbillies. But if it keeps the price of crude down I’m willing to hum a few bars.

17 Responses leave one →
  1. 2011 February 1 9:23 am
    MI Conservative permalink

  2. 2011 February 1 9:54 am

  3. 2011 February 1 9:56 am
    justrand permalink

    drdog, those same oil sands and their cousin, oil shale, are abundant in the U.S. as well. We’re just not allowed to harvest them…yet.

  4. 2011 February 1 10:15 am

    Another second look at Huntsman ????

  5. 2011 February 1 10:46 am
    mulletover permalink

    There is nothing hotter than Megyn Kelly taking apart some Obama minion who is trying to spin the obamacare defeat. I don’t know who the little $hit was, but he was trying to say the score (???) was 12 to 2. She came off the blocks with particulars on each of the cases he was trying to referenced, and sent them all to the trash bin. She then detailed the merits of the Vinson decision setting it apart from all the others……….. Wham! Bam! Pow!

    Nothing. Hotter. Evah.

    Whew! I need a cold shower.

  6. 2011 February 1 11:00 am
    drdog09 permalink

    That’s why I posted it JR. This is a datapoint I was not aware of till today. I thought the oil sand/shale thing at commercial levels was still not there. Its good to be wrong from time to time! 🙂

  7. 2011 February 1 11:12 am
    brucefdb permalink

    Not to mention the Continental Shelf, ANWR, et al….this needs to be a 2012 push along with Healthcare.

    But I think the Obama regime means to collapse the dollar before 2012. No other way to explain what they are doing. Reduce the country to rubble and rebuild socialist utopia.

  8. 2011 February 1 11:13 am
    drdog09 permalink

    McConnell to bring the House repeal bill as an attachment to a FAA bill —

  9. 2011 February 1 11:58 am

  10. 2011 February 1 12:03 pm

    10 OTB???????????

    You killed this htread, IP

  11. 2011 February 1 12:03 pm


  12. 2011 February 1 12:04 pm

    New thread please, courtesy of IP’s link to KOS lite

  13. 2011 February 1 12:09 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    Well before it goes. Why you don’t screw around with a Gurkha —

    40:1, sounds like even odds to me…

  14. 2011 February 1 12:19 pm
    drdog09 permalink

    Well the ‘oh crap’ is really a crap of an article. What Doug Mataconis attempts to do is move the goal posts. Nor do I suspect he has read the depth of Vinson’s ruling. In all the citations offered in the article, they all hinge on an “Activity” regardless of whether it is intra or inter state. That has been a consistent precept first laid down by the Walton case way back in the 30’s. So long as there is an active role of commerce attached it is Congress’s sphere to issue regulations as to the activity.

    But Vinson has taken the opposite tact in that one may not regulate nonactivity. That was the core of the govts case. That the lack of insurance was economic in scope (true) but impacted commerce of those that were active in insurance. I don’t see how Scalia can square the differnces yet rule consistence with Walton and maintain the thread of law that SCOTUS has used for neigh on 80 years.

  15. 2011 February 1 12:22 pm

    “What Doug Mataconis attempts to do is move the goal posts.”

    He’s a Charles Johnson wannabe.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.