What did Steven Stills Say

Discuss all political matters here!
vman
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 2782
Joined: February 20th, 2006, 11:40 am
Reputation: 0
Contact:

What did Steven Stills Say

Postby vman » March 25th, 2011, 9:00 pm

There's something happenin' here:

Image

Vman depicted Georgey Soros’ scary, scary plan(s) for you all during Barry’s campaign…now the plot thickens:
Obama lent 2 billion to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan….. It amazes me that the U.S. moratorium on off-shore drilling doesn’t include Petrobras. I understand the sentiment of not wanting another spill, but saying we're not going to drill anymore is like saying, "I got food poisoning so I'll never eat again". Ultimately, it's suicidal. Allowing a foreign company to do things Americans are not allowed to do is economic suicide…..But in keeping with the colonialist/socialist views we keep seeing out of this president.
Obama and his lackeys authorized a permit for Petrobras to submerge a storage tank in the Gulf of Mexico. This allows the oil company to start drilling 165 miles off the Louisiana coast in deep water. How much money has changed hands or does only Mr. Soros and Obama see the upside. This loan has been disputed by Barry apologist but on June 13, 2010 the U.S. Export-Import Bank tells us it has issued a "preliminary commitment" letter to Petrobras in the amount of $2 billion and has discussed with Brazil the possibility of increasing that amount. Export-Import Bank says it has not decided whether the money will come in the form of a direct loan or loan guarantees. Either way, this corporate foreign aid may strike some as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas.
Is it a coincidence that Obama backer George Soros repositioned himself in Petrobras to get dividends just a few days before Obama committed $2 billion in loans and guarantees for Petrobras’ offshore operations???
BTW, at one recent review these were the top 5 holdings of George Soros
1.Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.Petrobras (PBR) – 9,818,323 shares, 15.42% of the total portfolio
2.Hess Corp. (HES) – 5,123,198 shares, 10.56% of the total portfolio
3.Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.Petrobras (PBR-A) – 5,884,700 shares, 7.53% of the total portfolio
4.Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc. (POT) – 1,978,053 shares, 7.06% of the total portfolio
5.Plains Exploration & Production Company (PXP) – 6,526,400 shares, 6.84% of the total portfolio

Aug. 15 2010 Billionaire investor George Soros bought an $811 million stake in Petroleo Brasileiro SA in the second quarter, making the Brazilian state-controlled oil company his investment fund's largest holding.

As of June 30, 2010 the stake in Petrobras made up 22 percent of the $3.68 billion of stocks and American depositary receipts held by Soros Fund Management LLC, according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Petrobras has since slumped 28 percent.

So I ask; Why did Barry go to Brazil? Was it payback for financial backing/campaign billions? One thing you conveniently did not see reported by the MSM was who accompanied Barry….. CEOs Jeffrey Immelt of General Electric, Aris Candris of Westinghouse, James T. Hackett of Anadarko Petroleum, John V. Faraci of International Paper and Anthony S. Harrington of Albright Stonebridge Group went to Brazil with the president; Albright Stonebridge is interesting: Remember Sandy Berger, the man who hid state secrets in his underwear and socks? Well, he works for Anthony S. Harrington at Albright Stonebridge Group, as well as the craziest woman in the history of the U.S. government, Madeline K. Albright.
This is a fundraising trip for Obama…he’s taking care of his boiz/hooking them up w/ Brazilian companies & more….and those traveling with him will pay or have paid a handsome fee to do so – will soon be making a major contribution!
I don’t know, we are currently isolating Libya's oil supply one cruise missile at a time……we are going to need a new supplier since we can't drill our own!! But Petrobras went from a hi-debt / poor credit rating to the third largest oil company in the world in a little over a years time...

The United States in the last two years has restricted oil exploration of the sort Brazil is now rushing to embrace. We have run up more than $4 trillion in consecutive budget deficits during the Obama administration and are near federal insolvency. Therefore, the United States should be happy to borrow more money to purchase the sort of “new stable sources of energy” from Brazil’s offshore wells that we most certainly will not develop off our own coasts.
It seems as if paying lots more for electricity and gas, in European fashion, was originally part of the president’s new green agenda. He helped push cap-and-trade legislation through the House of Representatives in 2009. Had such Byzantine regulations become law, a recessionary economy would have sunk into depression. Obama appointed the incompetent Van Jones as “green-jobs czar” — until Jones’s wild rantings confirmed that he knew nothing about his job description “to advance the administration’s climate and energy initiatives.”
At a time of trillion-dollar deficits, the administration is borrowing billions to promote high-speed rail, and is heavily invested in the federally subsidized $42,000 Government Motors Chevy Volt. Apparently the common denominator here is a deductive view that high energy prices will force Americans to emulate European centrally planned and state-run transportation.
That conclusion is not wild conspiracy theory, but simply the logical manifestation of many of the Obama administration’s earlier campaign promises. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu — now responsible for the formulation of American energy policy — summed up his visions to the Wall Street Journal in 2008: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” I think Chu is finally figuring out the “somehow.”
A year earlier, Chu was more explicit in his general contempt for the sort of fuels that now keep Americans warm and on the road: “Coal is my worst nightmare. . . . We have lots of fossil fuel. That’s really both good and bad news. We won’t run out of energy but there’s enough carbon in the ground to really cook us.”
In fairness to Chu, he was only amplifying what Obama himself outlined during the 2008 campaign. Today’s soaring energy prices are exactly what candidate Obama once dreamed about “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Obama, like Chu, made that dream even more explicit in the case of coal: “So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”
There are lots of ironies to these Alice-in-Wonderland energy fantasies. As the public becomes outraged over gas prices, a panicked Obama pivots to brag that we are pumping more oil than ever before — but only for a time, and only because his predecessors approved the type of drilling he has stopped.
The entire climate-change movement, fairly or not, is now in shambles, thanks to serial scandals about faked research, consecutive record cold and wet winters in much of Europe and the United States, and the conflict-of-interest, get-rich schemes of prominent global-warming preachers such as the lunatic Al Gore.
The administration’s energy visions are formulated by academics and government bureaucrats who live mostly in cities with short commutes and have worked largely for public agencies. These utopians have no idea that without reasonably priced fuel and power, the self-employed farmer cannot produce food. The private plant operator cannot create plastics. And the trucker cannot bring goods to the consumer — all the basics like lettuce, iPads, and Levis that a highly educated, urbanized elite both enjoys and yet has no idea of how a distant someone else made their unbridled consumption possible.
Last edited by vman on September 20th, 2011, 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.


I have to say thank you to me ..." for not being stupid enough to go to Penn State."

  • Advertisement
Manfred
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 4586
Joined: August 2nd, 2009, 7:23 pm
Reputation: 190

Re: What did Steven Stills Say

Postby Manfred » March 28th, 2011, 8:11 pm

I -AM- impressed, vman. This is so freakin' outrageous it's laughable. I don't get to follow Rush, Beck, or Hannity much anymore, so wasn't aware of this s_h_i_t.
Last edited by Manfred on September 20th, 2011, 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
The world as we know it underwent a rebirth 11-8-16. Conservatives have made themselves heard!

vman
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 2782
Joined: February 20th, 2006, 11:40 am
Reputation: 0
Contact:

Re: What did Steven Stills Say

Postby vman » March 31st, 2011, 1:04 pm

More interesting thought forwarded to me today:

Are Barack Obama's energy policies influenced by hedge fund billionaire and political patron, George Soros?

Abby Wisse Schacter, in the New York Post, notes that the Obama administration is clamping down on oil and gas development in America (both onshore and offshore) but is hell-bent on helping other nation's tap their resources and points out that such help is being showered specifically in New Guinea, of all places.

It is starting to look quite obvious that the administration doesn't want oil exploration and extraction at home while it is promoting the same exploration and extraction elsewhere -- specifically Brazil and New Guinea. "The Bureau of Ocean Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (BOEMRE) has assigned only six drilling engineers to process all permit applications pending in the Gulf of Mexico. While Michael Bromwich bemoans a lack of the staff necessary to speed up the process, he's sending his staffers to Papua New Guinea to advise its officials on ways to develop the country's offshore drilling infrastructure. A significant portion of the agency's budget is covered by fees, royalties, taxes, and rents from energy production, so curtailing drilling closes off cash flow too.


Others have commented on Obama's generosity regarding Brazil's oil wealth and how those actions might help George Soros.

But focus should now turn towards the exotic land of New Guinea.

New Guinea? Why there? Why is he using our taxpayer dollars to help energy development in New Guinea? Hasn't Secretary of the Interior Salazar bemoaned that his budget is just not large enough to process all the drilling permits submitted for tapping America's oil and gas wealth? Why are he and the President devoting staff and money to help that undeveloped island nation?

Perhaps, he just wants to pay back George Soros, who was so instrumental in helping his election and the election of fellow Democrats across America. George Soros is the Patron Saint of the Democratic Party and was a very early and generous supporter of Barack Obama's. Soros even used a loophole in Federal campaign laws that allowed him and his family to give outsized donations to Barack Obama; he also fielded his army of so-called 527 groups (such as MoveOn.Org) to help Obama win the Oval Office.

Soros also stands to massively benefit if New Guinea becomes an energy power, especially if the American taxpayer subsidizes this development.

George Soros, through his hedge fund, has a huge ownership interest in a company called InterOil (stock symbol IOC), whose one major asset is reportedly a huge reservoir of natural gas in New Guinea. He has been increasing his ownership stake in recent months and, as of last November, showed an 11.9% ownership stake. His InterOil holding is the third-largest stock holding in his hedge fund.

InterOil has been subject to some controversy -- there are some investors who are shorting the stock, thinking that the reserves may not be as large as claimed and that it will be very difficult to develop them given the problems with developing energy resources in such an undeveloped nation and the heavy expenses overcoming those problems entail.

The stock has been soaring upward, along with the rise in energy prices. The move may also be related to the prospect that Japan will rely more on liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports (from Asian nations such as New Guinea) to power its economy in the wake of its nuclear energy problems.

But there may also be a short squeeze propelling the stock upwards. This occurs when people sell the stock short. Shorting happens when investors think a stock will fall in price. They borrow the stock from others and then sell it. They hope to be able to replace the stock they borrowed by buying it back in the market after the stock price has declined. They profit if the price they pay to buy it back (and return it to the people they borrowed it from is lower than the price they sold it at).

The nightmare for short-sellers is when the price of the stock moves contrary to what they hoped, and it moves up. Then the pain and bloodletting starts. They may face margin calls. They have to see their shorts decline in value as the stock price moves up. They may eventually be forced to buy back the stock at ever high prices. Sometimes, if there is a large short position in terms of the percentage of the stock float, serious pain ensues as the stock shoots upwards when they are compelled to meet margin calls and cut their losses. Being caught on the wrong side of a short squeeze is akin to being subject to the Wall Street equivalent of water-boarding.

Meanwhile, those who own the stock (are "long" the stock) are happily counting their riches as the value of their stock soars. They laugh all the way to the bank, as the shorts lie bloodied, bruised, and defeated, all but begging for mercy.

How can one help engineer a short squeeze? One proven way is to foster a positive news flow that boosts the prospects for the stock and send its shares upwards. Sometimes, public relations firms are involved as they spin out a series of "news" items that promise untold riches to come from a company and its shareholders (a new product, new customers and contracts, the possible sale of the company).

However, the hype can go into overdrive if you partner up with a more powerful and richer partner -- say, the United States of America.

In the case of InterOil, one big positive development has been Barack Obama's decision to invest taxpayer dollars in stoking the development of energy resources in New Guinea. InterOil disproportionally benefits from the steps Barack Obama has taken in New Guinea since InterOil's assets are dominated by its New Guinea operations. InterOil will not have to spend its own money to develop (basically, build from the ground up) the infrastructure that is needed to fully tap the wealth that lies under the leases that InterOil has in New Guinea.

Instead, the American taxpayer picks up the tab. Sweet deal. We pay the costs and InterOil (along with its major shareholder, George Soros) picks up the profits.

The market sees what is going on, even if the American taxpayers do not. The American government is picking favorites and InterOil is one of them.

Has Barack Obama made American taxpayers complicit in engineering a short squeeze in InterOil stock by deciding to help build up the nascent energy industry in, of all places, New Guinea?

This is far from the first time that political patrons of Barack Obama have minted money from his energy policies......To compound the insult to American taxpayers, much of government spending comes from borrowing money from other nations, such as China. That nation is a huge energy importer. The Chinese would be among the first beneficiaries of the development of New Guinea energy resources. Why aren't the Chinese paying to develop New Guinea's energy wealth?

We won't be the beneficiaries from the spending of tax dollars in New Guinea? We may actually be the losers from all that spending.

We have an abundance of natural gas (due to the tapping of our own shale gas reserves); we don't need LNG. We have such vast amounts of natural gas that ports that were built to import LNG are being reconfigured to export LNG. Why is Obama spending our tax dollars to help a foreign competitor while increasing taxes exponentially on American oil and gas companies? Why encourage New Guinea to develop its LNG capability to export to China, Japan, and other nations when we can and should export our own LNG to them?

But helping America's oil and gas industry (and helping lower the energy bills for Americans) is not and never has been on the agenda of Barack Obama.

Obama's rewarding his friends and donors, who no doubt will reciprocate by supporting him in 2012, is Cook County Politics writ large. That modus operandi has always guided him.

Does his agenda include helping further enrich George Soros, sugar daddy of the Democratic Party?
Last edited by vman on September 20th, 2011, 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
I have to say thank you to me ..." for not being stupid enough to go to Penn State."

southpaw
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 2865
Joined: September 5th, 2003, 12:33 pm
Reputation: 2
Location: Helixville

Re: What did Steven Stills Say

Postby southpaw » March 31st, 2011, 2:07 pm

Keep it coming vman. Bozo Obama is a total fraud and clown.
Last edited by southpaw on September 20th, 2011, 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I'm your huckleberry"

Manfred
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 4586
Joined: August 2nd, 2009, 7:23 pm
Reputation: 190

Re: What did Steven Stills Say

Postby Manfred » March 31st, 2011, 6:48 pm

You do have your stuff together on this.
The world as we know it underwent a rebirth 11-8-16. Conservatives have made themselves heard!


Return to “Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests